各有其位，各有其伟大
本译文由人工智能辅助工具生成，可能存在不准确之处。如需查阅权威文本，请参考英文原文。
AI-translated. May contain errors. For accurate text, refer to the original English.
中文
第二章 各人各有其位
依据数论哲学，自然界由三种力量构成，梵文称之为萨埵（Sattva）、罗阇（Rajas）与答磨（Tamas）。这三种力量显现于物质世界，可分别称为平衡、活动与惰性。答磨以黑暗或不动为象征；罗阇为活动，以吸引或排斥为表现；萨埵则是二者之均衡。
每个人身上皆有这三种力量。有时答磨占主导——我们变得懒惰，无法行动，被某些观念或单纯的迟钝所束缚。有时活动占主导，有时则是那种平衡二者的宁静。在不同的人身上，其中一种力量往往居于主导地位。有人的特性是懈怠、迟钝与懒散；另一人的特性是活动、力量与精力的彰显；还有一人身上，我们发现那种柔和、宁静与温婉，这是动与静相互平衡的结果。在一切造化之中——动物、植物与人——我们都能发现这些不同力量或多或少的典型表现。
业瑜伽（Karma-Yoga）专门处理这三种因素。通过揭示其本质及运用之道，它帮助我们把工作做得更好。人类社会是一个层级分明的组织。我们都懂道德，也都知道责任，但同时我们发现，在不同国家，道德的含义差异极大。在一国被视为道德的行为，在另一国或许被认为全然不道德。例如，在某些国家，表兄妹可以成婚；在另一些国家，这被认为极不道德。在某些国家，男人可以娶嫂嫂或弟媳；在另一些国家，这被视为不道德。在某些国家，人只能结婚一次；在另一些国家，则可多次婚配，如此等等。同样，在道德的一切其他领域，我们发现标准差异极大——然而我们又有一种直觉，认为必定存在一个普世的道德标准。
责任亦是如此。责任的观念在不同民族之间差异甚大。在某一国，若一个人不做某些事，人们会说他行为有失；而在另一国，若他做了那些事，人们又会说他做得不对——然而我们知道，必定存在某种普世的责任观念。同样，某一阶层认为某些事属于自己的责任，另一阶层则持完全相反的看法，若要它做那些事，它会感到震惊。摆在我们面前的有两条路——愚昧者的路，他们认为通往真理只有一条道，其余皆为谬误；以及智慧者的路，他们承认，根据我们的心性构成或我们所处的不同存在层面，责任与道德可以有所不同。重要的是认识到：责任与道德均有高下之别——某一生命状态、某一特定环境中的责任，不会也不能与另一状态的责任相同。
举例说明：所有伟大的导师都曾教导「不抵抗恶」，即不抵抗是最高的道德理想。我们都知道，若有相当数量的人试图将这一格言完全付诸实践，整个社会结构将会瓦解，恶人将占据我们的财产与生命，任意妄为。即便只有一天的不抵抗，也会导致灾难。然而，在我们内心深处，我们直觉地感受到「不抵抗恶」这一教导的真理。这在我们看来似乎是最高的理想；但若只宣扬这一教义，则无异于谴责人类中的绝大多数。不仅如此，这还会使人们时刻感到自己在做错事，在一切行动中引发良心的困扰；这会削弱他们，而那种持续的自我否定将比任何其他软弱更能滋生恶行。对于已经开始憎恨自己的人，堕落之门已经开启；对于一个民族亦然。
我们的首要责任是不憎恨自己，因为要进步，我们必须首先对自己有信心，然后才能对神有信心。没有自信的人，永远无法对神有信心。因此，留给我们的唯一选择是承认：责任与道德在不同环境下有所不同；并非抵抗恶的人所做的事在本质上永远是错的，而是在他所处的不同环境中，抵抗恶甚至可能成为他的责任。
在阅读薄伽梵歌（Bhagavad-Gita）时，许多西方国家的读者或许对第二章感到惊讶——奎师那（Krishna）在那里称阿周那（Arjuna）为伪君子与懦夫，因为阿周那以敌方皆为亲友为由拒绝战斗或抵抗，并以不抵抗是爱的最高理想为辩辞。这对我们所有人都是一个重要的教训：在一切事物中，两个极端是相似的。极端的正与极端的负总是相似。当光的振动太慢时，我们看不见它；当振动太快时，我们同样看不见。声音亦然：音调极低时，我们听不见；极高时，也同样听不见。抵抗与不抵抗之间的差别亦是如此。一个人不抵抗，是因为他软弱、懒惰，不是不愿而是不能；另一个人知道自己若愿可以给予势不可挡的一击，然而他不仅不出手，还祝福他的敌人。那个因软弱而不抵抗的人犯了罪，因此不能从不抵抗中得到任何益处；而另一个人若出手抵抗，则会犯罪。佛陀放弃了他的王位，舍弃了他的地位，那才是真正的弃绝；但对于一无所有的乞丐而言，根本谈不上弃绝。因此，当我们谈论不抵抗与理想之爱时，必须始终谨慎地明白我们真正的意思。我们必须首先弄清楚，自己是否具有抵抗的能力。然后，若拥有这种能力，我们放弃它而不抵抗，那是一种宏大的爱的行为；但若我们无力抵抗，却同时试图自我欺骗，以为自己出于最高之爱而行动，那我们所做的恰恰相反。阿周那在面对强大的敌阵时成了懦夫；他的「爱」使他忘记了对国家与君王的责任。这就是奎师那称他为伪君子的原因：你言如智者，行却露出懦夫本色；因此，站起来，战斗！
这就是业瑜伽的核心思想。业瑜伽修行者是这样一个人：他理解最高理想是不抵抗，同时也知道这种不抵抗是实际拥有的力量之最高表现；而所谓抵抗恶，不过是走向这种最高力量即不抵抗之表现途中的一个阶梯。在达到这一最高理想之前，人的责任是抵抗恶；让他去工作，让他去战斗，让他全力出击。只有当他获得了抵抗的能力之后，不抵抗才会成为一种美德。
我曾在故土遇见一个人，此前我认识他，知道他极为愚钝迟滞，一无所知，也无求知的欲望，过着一种近乎禽兽的生活。他问我应当怎样认识神，怎样获得解脱（Moksha）。「你会说谎吗？」我问他。「不会，」他回答。「那你必须学会说谎。说谎比做禽兽或一段朽木要好。你无所作为；你当然还没有达到那超越一切行动、宁静安详的最高境界；你甚至太迟钝，连做坏事都做不到。」那当然是一个极端的例子，我不过是在跟他开玩笑；但我的意思是，一个人必须积极行动，才能经由活动而达到完全的宁静。
惰性应当以一切手段加以避免。活动始终意味着抵抗。抵抗一切恶——无论心灵上的还是肉体上的；当你成功地抵抗之后，宁静便会到来。说「不憎恨任何人，不抵抗恶」是很容易的，但我们知道这类话在实践中通常意味着什么。当社会的目光注视着我们时，我们或许会做出不抵抗的样子，但在我们内心深处，始终是溃烂。我们深感缺乏不抵抗之宁静；我们感到抵抗对我们更为有益。若你渴望财富，同时又知道整个世界都把追求财富的人看作极其邪恶之人，你或许不敢投身于对财富的争夺，然而你的心思日夜都在追逐金钱。这是虚伪，毫无用处。投身于世界，然后，经过一段时间，当你受尽苦楚、享尽其中一切之后，弃绝便会到来；宁静便会到来。所以，去实现你对权力以及一切的渴望，在你满足了欲望之后，时机便会到来，你将认识到它们都不过是些微不足道之物；但在你实现这一欲望之前，在你历经那番活动之前，你不可能进入宁静、安详与自我臣服的状态。关于宁静与弃绝的观念已被宣讲了数千年；每个人从童年起便已听闻，然而我们发现世上真正达到那一境界者寥寥无几。我不知道自己一生中是否见过二十个真正宁静而不抵抗的人，而我已经游历了大半个世界。
每个人都应当承担起自己的理想，并努力实现它。这是比承担他人理想更可靠的进步之道，因为那些他人的理想，他永远无望实现。举例来说，我们拿一个孩子，立刻要求他步行二十英里。要么这小孩死去，要么千人中有一人爬完这二十英里，到达终点时精疲力竭，奄奄一息。这就像我们通常试图对待世界的方式。任何社会中的所有男男女女，心智能力各不相同，做事的力量也各异；他们必须有不同的理想，我们无权嘲笑任何理想。让每个人尽其所能地实现自己的理想。我也无权用你的标准来评判我，或用我的标准来评判你。评判苹果树不能用橡树的标准，评判橡树也不能用苹果树的标准。评判苹果树，必须用苹果的标准；评判橡树，则用橡树本身的标准。
「多样中的统一」是造化的计划。无论男女个体之间差异多大，背后都有统一的根基。不同的个体特质与人类的不同阶层，是造化中自然的变化。因此，我们不应以同一标准评判他们，也不应为他们设定同一理想。这样做只会造成不自然的冲突，结果是人开始憎恨自己，妨碍了他走向宗教与善良。我们的责任是鼓励每个人在竭力活出其最高理想的奋斗中前行，同时努力使这理想尽可能接近真理。
在印度教的道德体系中，我们发现这一事实从极古之时便已得到承认；在他们的经典与伦理著作中，为不同阶层的人制定了不同的规则——居士（在家者）、桑雅辛（Sannyasin，出家者，即已弃绝世界之人）与学生。
依据印度教经典，每个人的生命除了人类共通的普世责任之外，各有其特有的责任。印度教徒以学生身份开始生命；然后结婚成为居士；年老时隐退；最后舍弃世界，成为桑雅辛。这些生命的每个阶段都附有特定的责任。这些阶段中没有哪一个在本质上优于另一个。已婚之人的生命与献身于宗教修行的独身者的生命同样伟大。街上的清洁工与宝座上的国王同样伟大而荣耀。把他从宝座上拉下来，让他做清洁工的工作，看他表现如何。把那清洁工提拔起来，看他如何统治。说生活于世外之人比生活于世中之人更伟大是没有意义的；活在世中同时礼拜神，远比舍弃世界、过自由轻松的生活更为困难。印度四个生命阶段在后来被简化为两个——居士与僧侣。居士结婚并履行公民责任，而另一方则将全部精力奉献于宗教、传教与礼拜神。我将为你们朗读《大涅槃怛特罗》中几段论及此主题的段落，你们将会看到，对于一个居士来说，完美地履行所有责任是一项极其艰难的任务：
居士应当虔敬于神；对神的认识应当是他生命的目标。然而他必须不断劳作，履行一切责任；他必须将行动的果实献给神。
在这个世界上，最困难的事是工作而不在乎结果，帮助一个人却从不认为他应当感恩，做某些善事却同时从不回望它是否带来了名声或荣耀，抑或全然一无所获。即便是最彻底的懦夫，当世界赞美他时也会变得勇敢。一个愚人，当社会的认可降临于他时，也能做出英雄的壮举；但对于一个人来说，持续行善而不在乎同侪的认可，实乃人所能成就的最高牺牲。居士的最大责任是谋生，但他必须谨慎，不可通过说谎、欺骗或抢夺他人来谋生；他必须记住，他的生命是为了服务神和穷人。
知道父母是神的有形代表，居士必须始终以一切方式令他们欢欣。若母亲欢悦，父亲欢悦，神便对此人欢悦。从不对父母说刻薄之言的孩子，才是真正的好孩子。
在父母面前，不得开玩笑，不得显出不安，不得显露愤怒或急躁。在父母面前，孩子必须深深鞠躬，在他们面前站立，非等他们命令就坐，不得自行入座。
若居士在自己享用饮食与衣物之前，未先看顾母亲与父亲、子女、妻子及穷人，他便在犯罪。母亲与父亲是这具身体的来源；因此，人必须历经千般辛苦，以便善待他们。
对妻子的责任亦是如此。男人绝不应责骂妻子，并必须始终供养她，如同供养自己的母亲。即便在他最大的困难与磨难中，也不得向妻子发怒。
凡是心思另有所系、觊觎他人妻室之人，哪怕只是在心念上触碰她——那个男人将堕入黑暗地狱。
在女性面前，不得说不雅之言，不得夸耀自己的能力。不得自吹自擂，说「我做了这个，我做了那个」。
居士必须始终以金钱、衣物、爱意、信诚与甘美之言取悦妻子，切勿做任何扰乱她的事。那个赢得了贞洁妻子之爱的男人，便在宗教上获得了成功，并具备了一切美德。
以下是对子女的责任：
儿子应当在爱中抚育至四岁；此后接受教育直至十六岁。当他二十岁时，应使他从事某种工作；此后父亲应如待同辈般亲切地对待他。女儿亦应以完全相同的方式抚养，并受到最精心的教育。当她出嫁时，父亲应当给予她珠宝与财富。
其次是对兄弟姐妹的责任，以及对贫困的兄弟姐妹之子女的责任，还有对其他亲属、朋友与仆人的责任。再次是对同村乡人、穷人以及任何前来求助之人的责任。若家境宽裕的居士不照顾亲戚与穷人，当知他不过是一头畜牲；他不配称为人。
过度执着于饮食、衣物、刻意调养身体以及梳妆打扮，应当加以避免。居士必须心地纯洁，身体洁净，常常积极，随时准备工作。
面对敌人，居士必须是一位勇士。他必须抵抗他们。这是居士的责任。他不得坐在角落里哭泣，空谈不抵抗的废话。若他在敌人面前不展现出勇士的风骨，他便没有尽到责任。而对于朋友与亲属，他则必须温柔如羔羊。
居士的责任是不向恶人献上敬意；因为若他尊重世上的恶人，便是在庇护邪恶；若他轻慢那些值得尊重的人、善良之人，则是大错。他对友谊不可流于滥情；不可到处主动结交朋友；他必须观察他想结交之人的行为，以及他们与他人的往来，加以思量，然后再缔结友谊。
以下三件事他不得谈论。他不得在公开场合谈论自己的名声；不得宣扬自己的名字或自己的能力；不得谈论自己的财富，或任何别人私下告知他的事情。
一个人不应说自己贫穷，也不应说自己富有——不得炫耀财富。让他守好自己的秘密；这是他的宗教责任。这不仅仅是世俗的智慧；若一个人不这样做，他可被视为不道德之人。
居士是整个社会的基础与支柱。他是主要的养家者。穷人、弱者、不事劳作的儿童与女性——所有人都仰赖居士生活；因此他必须承担某些责任，而这些责任必须使他感到有力量去履行，而不是让他认为自己在做有损于自身理想的事。因此，若他做了某些软弱之事，或犯了某些错误，他不得在公开场合说出来；若他正从事某项事业，且知道必然会失败，他也不得谈及此事。这种自我暴露不仅毫无必要，而且会使人意志消沉，令他无力履行生命中应尽的责任。与此同时，他必须努力奋进，获取这些东西——首先是知识，其次是财富。这是他的责任，若他不尽责任，他便一无是处。一个不努力求取财富的居士是不道德的。若他懒散，安于闲逸的生活，他是不道德的，因为有数百人依赖于他。若他获得财富，数百人将因此得到供养。
若这座城市中没有数百个曾经努力致富、并已积累财富之人，那一切文明、那些慈善机构与宏伟建筑将在哪里？
在这种情况下追求财富并无不妥，因为那财富是用来分施的。居士是生命与社会的中心。对他而言，积累财富并高尚地使用财富，乃是一种礼拜；因为那个以正当手段、为正当目的而努力致富的居士，与那个在斗室中祈祷的苦行者，实际上是在为达到解脱而做着同样的事情；因为在他们身上，我们看到的不过是同一种美德——即由对神及其所造一切的虔敬之情所激发的自我舍弃与自我牺牲——的不同表现。
他必须以一切方式努力获得好名声。他不得赌博，不得与恶人为伍，不得说谎，不得成为令他人困扰的根源。
人们常常投身于自己无力完成的事情，结果为达到自身目的而欺骗他人。此外，在一切事情上都必须考虑时机这一因素；某一时期或许是失败，在另一时期也许会是极大的成功。
居士必须说真话，说话温和，使用人们喜爱、对他人有益的言辞；也不应谈论他人的事务。
居士通过挖掘水池、在路边种树、为人畜设立休憩之所、修建道路与桥梁，走向与最伟大的瑜伽修行者相同的目标。
这是业瑜伽教义的一个部分——活动，居士的责任。后文还有一段，说「若居士在战场上为国家或宗教而战死，他便达到与通过冥想的瑜伽修行者相同的目标」，由此表明，对一人而言是责任的，对另一人未必是责任。同时，经文并未说这种责任低下，而另一种高尚。每种责任各有其位，根据我们所处的环境，我们必须履行各自的责任。
从这一切中涌现出一个观念——对一切软弱的谴责。这是我们所有教义中我所欣赏的一个特质，无论是在哲学、宗教还是在行动中。若你阅读吠陀（Vedas），你会发现这个词始终反复出现——无畏——什么都不要惧怕。恐惧是软弱的标志。一个人必须履行自己的责任，而不去理会世界的嘲讽与讥笑。
若一个人退出世界去礼拜神，他不应认为那些生活于世中、为世界之善而工作的人没有在礼拜神；生活于世中、为妻儿而活的人，也不应认为那些舍弃世界的人是低贱的流浪者。各人各有其位。这一思想，我将以一个故事来加以阐释。
某位国王常常问来到他国度的桑雅辛们：「哪种人更伟大——弃绝世界成为桑雅辛的人，还是生活于世中履行居士责任的人？」许多智者试图解答这个问题。有人断言桑雅辛更伟大，国王便要求他们证明这一论断。当他们无法证明时，国王命令他们娶妻成为居士。又有人来说：「履行责任的居士更伟大。」对于他们，国王同样要求证明。当他们同样无法给出证明时，国王也让他们定居下来，成为居士。
最后来了一位年轻的桑雅辛，国王同样向他提出了这个问题。他回答说：「大王啊，各人在其位上同样伟大。」「请向我证明，」国王说。「我会向你证明，」桑雅辛说，「但你必须先按我的方式生活几天，这样我才能向你证明我所说的。」国王同意了，跟随桑雅辛离开了自己的领地，穿越了许多国家，最终来到一个大王国。在那个王国的都城里，正在举行一场盛大的仪式。国王与桑雅辛听到了鼓乐之声，也听到了宣告者的声音；人们身着节日盛装聚集在街道上，一则重要的公告正在宣布。国王与桑雅辛驻足观望，想看看究竟发生了什么。宣告者高声宣布，那个国家国王的女儿公主即将从聚集于她面前的众人中选择一位丈夫。
这是印度古老的习俗，公主们以这种方式选择丈夫。每位公主心中都有对理想丈夫的某种期望。有人想要最英俊的男子，有人只要最博学的，还有人只要最富有的，如此等等。附近各国的王子们都穿上最华美的盛装，来到她面前。有时他们也有自己的宣告者，来历数他们的优点以及他们之所以希望公主选中自己的理由。公主被抬在华轿上，以最华丽的装扮巡游，观察并聆听关于他们的介绍。若她对所见所闻不满意，便对抬轿者说「继续前行」，被拒绝的求婚者便无人理睬。然而，若公主对某人满意，她便将一串花环抛在他身上，他便成了她的丈夫。
我们的国王与桑雅辛所来到的那个国家的公主，正在举行这样一场有趣的仪式。她是世界上最美丽的公主，而公主的丈夫将在她父亲死后成为王国的统治者。这位公主的心意是嫁给最英俊的男子，但她始终找不到令她满意的人选。这样的聚会已举行过好几次，但公主始终无法选定丈夫。这一次是其中最为盛大的一次；来者比以往任何一次都多。公主乘坐华轿而来，抬轿者将她从一处抬到另一处。她似乎对任何人都不感兴趣，所有人都开始失望，觉得这次聚会也将以失败告终。就在此时，一位年轻男子出现了——一位桑雅辛，英俊得仿佛太阳降临人间，站在人群的一角，观望着这一切。载着公主的华轿来到他近前，公主一见到这位英俊的桑雅辛，便停了下来，将花环抛在他身上。年轻的桑雅辛抓住花环，将它抛了开去，高呼道：「这是什么荒唐事？我是一名桑雅辛。婚姻与我何干？」那个国家的国王以为此人或许因为贫穷而不敢娶公主，便对他说：「我的女儿嫁给你，现在给你半个王国，我死后给你整个王国！」又将花环套在桑雅辛身上。年轻人再度将花环抛开，说道：「胡闹！我不想成婚，」随即快步离开了聚会。
这时，公主已对这位年轻人爱得如此深沉，她说：「我必须嫁给这个人，否则我将死去」；于是她跟着他去，想将他带回来。接着，那位带领国王前来的另一位桑雅辛对国王说：「大王，让我们跟随这两人」；于是他们在相当的距离之后跟着走。那位拒绝娶公主的年轻桑雅辛走进了乡野，走了好几英里。当他来到一片树林并进入其中时，公主也跟着进去，另外两人也跟了上来。这位年轻桑雅辛对那片树林极为熟悉，知道其中所有错综复杂的小径。他突然转入其中一条小径，消失了，公主无法找到他。她寻找了很长时间，找不到他，便坐在一棵树下哭泣，因为她不知道出路。这时，我们的国王与另一位桑雅辛走近她，说道：「不要哭泣；我们会带你走出这片树林，但现在天色太暗，我们无法找到路。这里有一棵大树；让我们在树下休息，明晨一早，我们便带你找到出路。」
在那棵树上，住着一只小鸟、它的妻子和三只小雏鸟，就在一个巢里。这只小鸟俯视树下，看到三个人，对妻子说：「亲爱的，我们该怎么办？家里来了客人，而现在正是冬天，我们没有火。」于是它飞走，衔来一截燃烧的木柴，落在客人面前，客人们添上燃料，生起一堆熊熊的火。但小鸟仍不满足。它再次对妻子说：「亲爱的，我们该怎么办？没有东西给这些人吃，他们饿着呢。我们是居家者；照顾任何来家里的人是我们的责任。我必须尽我所能，我愿以我的身体献给他们。」于是它纵身跳入火焰之中，死去了。客人们看到它落下，试图救它，但它太快了。
小鸟的妻子见到丈夫的所为，说道：「这里有三个人，只有一只小鸟供他们吃，不够。作为妻子，我的责任是不让丈夫的努力白费；让他们也得到我的身体吧。」于是她也跳入火中，被烧死了。
接着，三只雏鸟看到父母所做的一切，又看到食物仍然不够三位客人所用，说道：「父母已尽其所能，仍然不够。继承父母的事业是我们的责任；让我们的身体也去吧。」于是它们全都冲向了火焰。
目睹这一切的三个人深感震撼，当然无法吃下这些鸟儿。他们没有食物地度过了那一夜，清晨，国王与桑雅辛带着公主找到了出路，她回到了父亲身边。
随后，桑雅辛对国王说：「大王，你已亲眼见到，各人在其位各有其伟大之处。若你想活在世中，就要像那些鸟儿一样而活，随时准备为他人牺牲自己。若你想弃绝世界，就要像那位年轻人一样，对他而言，最美丽的女子与一个王国都不过是虚无。若你选择居士的生命，就要将自己的生命献祭于他人的福祉；若你选择弃绝的生命，就连美貌、金钱与权力都不要去看一眼。各人各有其位，但此人之责任并非彼人之责任。」
English
CHAPTER II
EACH IS GREAT IN HIS OWN PLACE
According to the Sânkhya philosophy, nature is composed of three forces called, in Sanskrit, Sattva, Rajas, and Tamas. These as manifested in the physical world are what we may call equilibrium, activity, and inertness. Tamas is typified as darkness or inactivity; Rajas is activity, expressed as attraction or repulsion; and Sattva is the equilibrium of the two.
In every man there are these three forces. Sometimes Tamas prevails. We become lazy, we cannot move, we are inactive, bound down by certain ideas or by mere dullness. At other times activity prevails, and at still other times that calm balancing of both. Again, in different men, one of these forces is generally predominant. The characteristic of one man is inactivity, dullness and laziness; that of another, activity, power, manifestation of energy; and in still another we find the sweetness, calmness, and gentleness, which are due to the balancing of both action and inaction. So in all creation — in animals, plants, and men — we find the more or less typical manifestation of all these different forces.
Karma-Yoga has specially to deal with these three factors. By teaching what they are and how to employ them, it helps us to do our work better. Human society is a graded organization. We all know about morality, and we all know about duty, but at the same time we find that in different countries the significance of morality varies greatly. What is regarded as moral in one country may in another be considered perfectly immoral. For instance, in one country cousins may marry; in another, it is thought to be very immoral; in one, men may marry their sisters-in-law; in another, it is regarded as immoral; in one country people may marry only once; in another, many times; and so forth. Similarly, in all other departments of morality, we find the standard varies greatly — yet we have the idea that there must be a universal standard of morality.
So it is with duty. The idea of duty varies much among different nations. In one country, if a man does not do certain things, people will say he has acted wrongly; while if he does those very things in another country, people will say that he did not act rightly — and yet we know that there must be some universal idea of duty. In the same way, one class of society thinks that certain things are among its duty, while another class thinks quite the opposite and would be horrified if it had to do those things. Two ways are left open to us — the way of the ignorant, who think that there is only one way to truth and that all the rest are wrong, and the way of the wise, who admit that, according to our mental constitution or the different planes of existence in which we are, duty and morality may vary. The important thing is to know that there are gradations of duty and of morality — that the duty of one state of life, in one set of circumstances, will not and cannot be that of another.
To illustrate: All great teachers have taught, "Resist not evil," that non-resistance is the highest moral ideal. We all know that, if a certain number of us attempted to put that maxim fully into practice, the whole social fabric would fall to pieces, the wicked would take possession of our properties and our lives, and would do whatever they liked with us. Even if only one day of such non-resistance were practiced, it would lead to disaster. Yet, intuitively, in our heart of hearts we feel the truth of the teaching "Resist not evil." This seems to us to be the highest ideal; yet to teach this doctrine only would be equivalent to condemning a vast portion of mankind. Not only so, it would be making men feel that they were always doing wrong, and cause in them scruples of conscience in all their actions; it would weaken them, and that constant self-disapproval would breed more vice than any other weakness would. To the man who has begun to hate himself the gate to degeneration has already opened; and the same is true of a nation.
Our first duty is not to hate ourselves, because to advance we must have faith in ourselves first and then in God. He who has no faith in himself can never have faith in God. Therefore, the only alternative remaining to us is to recognise that duty and morality vary under different circumstances; not that the man who resists evil is doing what is always and in itself wrong, but that in the different circumstances in which he is placed it may become even his duty to resist evil.
In reading the Bhagavad-Gita, many of you in Western countries may have felt astonished at the second chapter, wherein Shri Krishna calls Arjuna a hypocrite and a coward because of his refusal to fight, or offer resistance, on account of his adversaries being his friends and relatives, making the plea that non-resistance was the highest ideal of love. This is a great lesson for us all to learn, that in all matters the two extremes are alike. The extreme positive and the extreme negative are always similar. When the vibrations of light are too slow, we do not see them, nor do we see them when they are too rapid. So with sound; when very low in pitch, we do not hear it; when very high, we do not hear it either. Of like nature is the difference between resistance and non-resistance. One man does not resist because he is weak, lazy, and cannot, not because he will not; the other man knows that he can strike an irresistible blow if he likes; yet he not only does not strike, but blesses his enemies. The one who from weakness resists not commits a sin, and as such cannot receive any benefit from the non-resistance; while the other would commit a sin by offering resistance. Buddha gave up his throne and renounced his position, that was true renunciation; but there cannot be any question of renunciation in the case of a beggar who has nothing to renounce. So we must always be careful about what we really mean when we speak of this non-resistance and ideal love. We must first take care to understand whether we have the power of resistance or not. Then, having the power, if we renounce it and do not resist, we are doing a grand act of love; but if we cannot resist, and yet, at the same time, try to deceive ourselves into the belief that we are actuated by motives of the highest love, we are doing the exact opposite. Arjuna became a coward at the sight of the mighty array against him; his "love" made him forget his duty towards his country and king. That is why Shri Krishna told him that he was a hypocrite: Thou talkest like a wise man, but thy actions betray thee to be a coward; therefore stand up and fight!
Such is the central idea of Karma-Yoga. The Karma-Yogi is the man who understands that the highest ideal is non-resistance, and who also knows that this non-resistance is the highest manifestation of power in actual possession, and also what is called the resisting of evil is but a step on the way towards the manifestation of this highest power, namely, non-resistance. Before reaching this highest ideal, man's duty is to resist evil; let him work, let him fight, let him strike straight from the shoulder. Then only, when he has gained the power to resist, will non-resistance be a virtue.
I once met a man in my country whom I had known before as a very stupid, dull person, who knew nothing and had not the desire to know anything, and was living the life of a brute. He asked me what he should do to know God, how he was to get free. "Can you tell a lie?" I asked him. "No," he replied. "Then you must learn to do so. It is better to tell a lie than to be a brute, or a log of wood. You are inactive; you have not certainly reached the highest state, which is beyond all actions, calm and serene; you are too dull even to do something wicked." That was an extreme case, of course, and I was joking with him; but what I meant was that a man must be active in order to pass through activity to perfect calmness.
Inactivity should be avoided by all means. Activity always means resistance. Resist all evils, mental and physical; and when you have succeeded in resisting, then will calmness come. It is very easy to say, "Hate nobody, resist not evil," but we know what that kind of thing generally means in practice. When the eyes of society are turned towards us, we may make a show of non-resistance, but in our hearts it is canker all the time. We feel the utter want of the calm of non-resistance; we feel that it would be better for us to resist. If you desire wealth, and know at the same time that the whole world regards him who aims at wealth as a very wicked man, you, perhaps, will not dare to plunge into the struggle for wealth, yet your mind will be running day and night after money. This is hypocrisy and will serve no purpose. Plunge into the world, and then, after a time, when you have suffered and enjoyed all that is in it, will renunciation come; then will calmness come. So fulfil your desire for power and everything else, and after you have fulfilled the desire, will come the time when you will know that they are all very little things; but until you have fulfilled this desire, until you have passed through that activity, it is impossible for you to come to the state of calmness, serenity, and self-surrender. These ideas of serenity and renunciation have been preached for thousands of years; everybody has heard of them from childhood, and yet we see very few in the world who have really reached that stage. I do not know if I have seen twenty persons in my life who are really calm and non-resisting, and I have travelled over half the world.
Every man should take up his own ideal and endeavour to accomplish it. That is a surer way of progress than taking up other men's ideals, which he can never hope to accomplish. For instance, we take a child and at once give him the task of walking twenty miles. Either the little one dies, or one in a thousand crawls the twenty miles, to reach the end exhausted and half-dead. That is like what we generally try to do with the world. All the men and women, in any society, are not of the same mind, capacity, or of the same power to do things; they must have different ideals, and we have no right to sneer at any ideal. Let every one do the best he can for realising his own ideal. Nor is it right that I should be judged by your standard or you by mine. The apple tree should not be judged by the standard of the oak, nor the oak by that of the apple. To judge the apple tree you must take the apple standard, and for the oak, its own standard.
Unity in variety is the plan of creation. However men and women may vary individually, there is unity in the background. The different individual characters and classes of men and women are natural variations in creation. Hence, we ought not to judge them by the same standard or put the same ideal before them. Such a course creates only an unnatural struggle, and the result is that man begins to hate himself and is hindered from becoming religious and good. Our duty is to encourage every one in his struggle to live up to his own highest ideal, and strive at the same time to make the ideal as near as possible to the truth.
In the Hindu system of morality we find that this fact has been recognised from very ancient times; and in their scriptures and books on ethics different rules are laid down for the different classes of men — the householder, the Sannyâsin (the man who has renounced the world), and the student.
The life of every individual, according to the Hindu scriptures, has its peculiar duties apart from what belongs in common to universal humanity. The Hindu begins life as a student; then he marries and becomes a householder; in old age he retires; and lastly he gives up the world and becomes a Sannyasin. To each of these stages of life certain duties are attached. No one of these stages is intrinsically superior to another. The life of the married man is quite as great as that of the celibate who has devoted himself to religious work. The scavenger in the street is quite as great and glorious as the king on his throne. Take him off his throne, make him do the work of the scavenger, and see how he fares. Take up the scavenger and see how he will rule. It is useless to say that the man who lives out of the world is a greater man than he who lives in the world; it is much more difficult to live in the world and worship God than to give it up and live a free and easy life. The four stages of life in India have in later times been reduced to two — that of the householder and of the monk. The householder marries and carries on his duties as a citizen, and the duty of the other is to devote his energies wholly to religion, to preach and to worship God. I shall read to you a few passages from the Mahâ-Nirvâna-Tantra, which treats of this subject, and you will see that it is a very difficult task for a man to be a householder, and perform all his duties perfectly:
The householder should be devoted to God; the knowledge of God should be his goal of life. Yet he must work constantly, perform all his duties; he must give up the fruits of his actions to God.
It is the most difficult thing in this world to work and not care for the result, to help a man and never think that he ought to be grateful, to do some good work and at the same time never look to see whether it brings you name or fame, or nothing at all. Even the most arrant coward becomes brave when the world praises him. A fool can do heroic deeds when the approbation of society is upon him, but for a man to constantly do good without caring for the approbation of his fellow men is indeed the highest sacrifice man can perform. The great duty of the householder is to earn a living, but he must take care that he does not do it by telling lies, or by cheating, or by robbing others; and he must remember that his life is for the service of God, and the poor.
Knowing that mother and father are the visible representatives of God, the householder, always and by all means, must please them. If the mother is pleased, and the father, God is pleased with the man. That child is really a good child who never speaks harsh words to his parents.
Before parents one must not utter jokes, must not show restlessness, must not show anger or temper. Before mother or father, a child must bow down low, and stand up in their presence, and must not take a seat until they order him to sit.
If the householder has food and drink and clothes without first seeing that his mother and his father, his children, his wife, and the poor, are supplied, he is committing a sin. The mother and the father are the causes of this body; so a man must undergo a thousand troubles in order to do good to them.
Even so is his duty to his wife. No man should scold his wife, and he must always maintain her as if she were his own mother. And even when he is in the greatest difficulties and troubles, he must not show anger to his wife.
He who thinks of another woman besides his wife, if he touches her even with his mind — that man goes to dark hell.
Before women he must not talk improper language, and never brag of his powers. He must not say, “I have done this, and I have done that.”
The householder must always please his wife with money, clothes, love, faith, and words like nectar, and never do anything to disturb her. That man who has succeeded in getting the love of a chaste wife has succeeded in his religion and has all the virtues.
The following are duties towards children:
A son should be lovingly reared up to his fourth year; he should be educated till he is sixteen. When he is twenty years of age he should be employed in some work; he should then be treated affectionately by his father as his equal. Exactly in the same manner the daughter should be brought up, and should be educated with the greatest care. And when she marries, the father ought to give her jewels and wealth.
Then the duty of the man is towards his brothers and sisters, and towards the children of his brothers and sisters, if they are poor, and towards his other relatives, his friends and his servants. Then his duties are towards the people of the same village, and the poor, and any one that comes to him for help. Having sufficient means, if the householder does not take care to give to his relatives and to the poor, know him to be only a brute; he is not a human being.
Excessive attachment to food, clothes, and the tending of the body, and dressing of the hair should be avoided. The householder must be pure in heart and clean in body, always active and always ready for work.
To his enemies the householder must be a hero. Them he must resist. That is the duty of the householder. He must not sit down in a corner and weep, and talk nonsense about non-resistance. If he does not show himself a hero to his enemies he has not done his duty. And to his friends and relatives he must be as gentle as a lamb.
It is the duty of the householder not to pay reverence to the wicked; because, if he reverences the wicked people of the world, he patronizes wickedness; and it will be a great mistake if he disregards those who are worthy of respect, the good people. He must not be gushing in his friendship; he must not go out of the way making friends everywhere; he must watch the actions of the men he wants to make friends with, and their dealings with other men, reason upon them, and then make friends.
These three things he must not talk of. He must not talk in public of his own fame; he must not preach his own name or his own powers; he must not talk of his wealth, or of anything that has been told to him privately.
A man must not say he is poor, or that he is wealthy — he must not brag of his wealth. Let him keep his own counsel; this is his religious duty. This is not mere worldly wisdom; if a man does not do so, he may be held to be immoral.
The householder is the basis, the prop, of the whole society. He is the principal earner. The poor, the weak, the children and the women who do not work — all live upon the householder; so there must be certain duties that he has to perform, and these duties must make him feel strong to perform them, and not make him think that he is doing things beneath his ideal. Therefore, if he has done something weak, or has made some mistake, he must not say so in public; and if he is engaged in some enterprise and knows he is sure to fail in it, he must not speak of it. Such self-exposure is not only uncalled for, but also unnerves the man and makes him unfit for the performance of his legitimate duties in life. At the same time, he must struggle hard to acquire these things — firstly, knowledge, and secondly, wealth. It is his duty, and if he does not do his duty, he is nobody. A householder who does not struggle to get wealth is immoral. If he is lazy and content to lead an idle life, he is immoral, because upon him depend hundreds. If he gets riches, hundreds of others will be thereby supported.
If there were not in this city hundreds who had striven to become rich, and who had acquired wealth, where would all this civilization, and these alms-houses and great houses be?
Going after wealth in such a case is not bad, because that wealth is for distribution. The householder is the centre of life and society. It is a worship for him to acquire and spend wealth nobly, for the householder who struggles to become rich by good means and for good purposes is doing practically the same thing for the attainment of salvation as the anchorite does in his cell when he is praying; for in them we see only the different aspects of the same virtue of self-surrender and self-sacrifice prompted by the feeling of devotion to God and to all that is His.
He must struggle to acquire a good name by all means. He must not gamble, he must not move in the company of the wicked, he must not tell lies, and must not be the cause of trouble to others.
Often people enter into things they have not the means to accomplish, with the result that they cheat others to attain their own ends. Then there is in all things the time factor to be taken into consideration; what at one time might be a failure, would perhaps at another time be a very great success.
The householder must speak the truth, and speak gently, using words which people like, which will do good to others; nor should he talk of the business of other men.
The householder by digging tanks, by planting trees on the roadsides, by establishing rest-houses for men and animals, by making roads and building bridges, goes towards the same goal as the greatest Yogi.
This is one part of the doctrine of Karma-Yoga — activity, the duty of the householder. There is a passage later on, where it says that "if the householder dies in battle, fighting for his country or his religion, he comes to the same goal as the Yogi by meditation," showing thereby that what is duty for one is not duty for another. At the same time, it does not say that this duty is lowering and the other elevating. Each duty has its own place, and according to the circumstances in which we are placed, we must perform our duties.
One idea comes out of all this — the condemnation of all weakness. This is a particular idea in all our teachings which I like, either in philosophy, or in religion, or in work. If you read the Vedas, you will find this word always repeated — fearlessness — fear nothing. Fear is a sign of weakness. A man must go about his duties without taking notice of the sneers and the ridicule of the world.
If a man retires from the world to worship God, he must not think that those who live in the world and work for the good of the world are not worshipping God: neither must those who live in the world, for wife and children, think that those who give up the world are low vagabonds. Each is great in his own place. This thought I will illustrate by a story.
A certain king used to inquire of all the Sannyasins that came to his country, "Which is the greater man — he who gives up the world and becomes a Sannyasin, or he who lives in the world and performs his duties as a house holder?" Many wise men sought to solve the problem. Some asserted that the Sannyasin was the greater, upon which the king demanded that they should prove their assertion. When they could not, he ordered them to marry and become householders. Then others came and said, "The householder who performs his duties is the greater man." Of them, too, the king demanded proofs. When they could not give them, he made them also settle down as householders.
At last there came a young Sannyasin, and the king similarly inquired of him also. He answered, "Each, O king, is equally great in his place." "Prove this to me," asked the king. "I will prove it to you," said the Sannyasin, "but you must first come and live as I do for a few days, that I may be able to prove to you what I say." The king consented and followed the Sannyasin out of his own territory and passed through many other countries until they came to a great kingdom. In the capital of that kingdom a great ceremony was going on. The king and the Sannyasin heard the noise of drums and music, and heard also the criers; the people were assembled in the streets in gala dress, and a great proclamation was being made. The king and the Sannyasin stood there to see what was going on. The crier was proclaiming loudly that the princess, daughter of the king of that country, was about to choose a husband from among those assembled before her.
It was an old custom in India for princesses to choose husbands in this way. Each princess had certain ideas of the sort of man she wanted for a husband. Some would have the handsomest man, others would have only the most learned, others again the richest, and so on. All the princes of the neighbourhood put on their bravest attire and presented themselves before her. Sometimes they too had their own criers to enumerate their advantages and the reasons why they hoped the princess would choose them. The princess was taken round on a throne, in the most splendid array, and looked at and heard about them. If she was not pleased with what she saw and heard, she said to her bearers, "Move on," and no more notice was taken of the rejected suitors. If, however, the princess was pleased with any one of them, she threw a garland of flowers over him and he became her husband.
The princess of the country to which our king and the Sannyasin had come was having one of these interesting ceremonies. She was the most beautiful princess in the world, and the husband of the princess would be ruler of the kingdom after her father's death. The idea of this princess was to marry the handsomest man, but she could not find the right one to please her. Several times these meetings had taken place, but the princess could not select a husband. This meeting was the most splendid of all; more people than ever had come to it. The princess came in on a throne, and the bearers carried her from place to place. She did not seem to care for any one, and every one became disappointed that this meeting also was going to be a failure. Just then came a young man, a Sannyasin, handsome as if the sun had come down to the earth, and stood in one corner of the assembly, watching what was going on. The throne with the princess came near him, and as soon as she saw the beautiful Sannyasin, she stopped and threw the garland over him. The young Sannyasin seized the garland and threw it off, exclaiming, "What nonsense is this? I am a Sannyasin. What is marriage to me?" The king of that country thought that perhaps this man was poor and so dared not marry the princess, and said to him, "With my daughter goes half my kingdom now, and the whole kingdom after my death!" and put the garland again on the Sannyasin. The young man threw it off once more, saying, "Nonsense! I do not want to marry," and walked quickly away from the assembly.
Now the princess had fallen so much in love with this young man that she said, "I must marry this man or I shall die"; and she went after him to bring him back. Then our other Sannyasin, who had brought the king there, said to him, "King, let us follow this pair"; so they walked after them, but at a good distance behind. The young Sannyasin who had refused to marry the princess walked out into the country for several miles. When he came to a forest and entered into it, the princess followed him, and the other two followed them. Now this young Sannyasin was well acquainted with that forest and knew all the intricate paths in it. He suddenly passed into one of these and disappeared, and the princess could not discover him. After trying for a long time to find him she sat down under a tree and began to weep, for she did not know the way out. Then our king and the other Sannyasin came up to her and said, "Do not weep; we will show you the way out of this forest, but it is too dark for us to find it now. Here is a big tree; let us rest under it, and in the morning we will go early and show you the road."
Now a little bird and his wife and their three little ones lived on that tree, in a nest. This little bird looked down and saw the three people under the tree and said to his wife, "My dear, what shall we do? Here are some guests in the house, and it is winter, and we have no fire." So he flew away and got a bit of burning firewood in his beak and dropped it before the guests, to which they added fuel and made a blazing fire. But the little bird was not satisfied. He said again to his wife, "My dear, what shall we do? There is nothing to give these people to eat, and they are hungry. We are householders; it is our duty to feed any one who comes to the house. I must do what I can, I will give them my body." So he plunged into the midst of the fire and perished. The guests saw him falling and tried to save him, but he was too quick for them.
The little bird's wife saw what her husband did, and she said, "Here are three persons and only one little bird for them to eat. It is not enough; it is my duty as a wife not to let my husband's effort go in vain; let them have my body also." Then she fell into the fire and was burned to death.
Then the three baby-birds, when they saw what was done and that there was still not enough food for the three guests, said, "Our parents have done what they could and still it is not enough. It is our duty to carry on the work of our parents; let our bodies go too." And they all dashed down into the fire also.
Amazed at what they saw, the three people could not of course eat these birds. They passed the night without food, and in the morning the king and the Sannyasin showed the princess the way, and she went back to her father.
Then the Sannyasin said to the king, "King, you have seen that each is great in his own place. If you want to live in the world, live like those birds, ready at any moment to sacrifice yourself for others. If you want to renounce the world, be like that young man to whom the most beautiful woman and a kingdom were as nothing. If you want to be a householder, hold your life a sacrifice for the welfare of others; and if you choose the life of renunciation, do not even look at beauty and money and power. Each is great in his own place, but the duty of the one is not the duty of the other.
文本来自Wikisource公共领域。原版由阿德瓦伊塔修道院出版。