薄伽梵歌（一）
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
1→博伽梵歌（一） 2→ 3→（一九〇〇年五月二十六日，于旧金山讲授） 4→ 5→理解《博伽梵歌》（Bhagavad Gita），需要了解其历史背景。《博伽梵歌》是对《奥义书》（Upanishads）的注疏。《奥义书》是印度的圣经，其地位与《新约》相当。构成《奥义书》的典籍超过百部，有的极为简短，有的篇幅宏大，各自独立成篇。《奥义书》并不揭示任何教师的生平，而只是单纯地讲授原理。它们仿佛是在学术聚会上——通常是在王廷——所作讨论的速记记录。"奥义书"（Upanishad）一词或许意为"聚集"，或"坐近于师旁"。凡研习过《奥义书》某些篇章的人，都能理解其文字是何等精炼的速记草稿。经过漫长的讨论之后，这些讨论或许凭借记忆被记录下来。困难在于，其背景交代极少，只有那些光辉的要点被提及。古梵文的起源在公元前五千年；《奥义书》至少在此之前两千年已经存在。无人确知它们究竟有多古老。《博伽梵歌》撷取了《奥义书》的思想，在某些情形下甚至照录其文字，将《奥义书》所探讨的整个主题，以简明、凝练、系统的形式贯串在一起。 6→ 7→印度教徒的原典称为《吠陀》（Vedas）。其数量之浩繁——那些文本的总量——若仅将文本搬来此处，这间房间都容纳不下。其中许多已经失传。它们被分成若干支派，每个支派交由某些祭司掌管，凭借记忆代代相传。这样的人至今仍然存在。他们能够一字不差、一个语调也不遗漏地背诵整部整部的《吠陀》。《吠陀》的大部分已经失传。留存的那小部分本身便构成一整个图书馆。其中最古老的部分包含《梨俱吠陀》的赞歌。现代学者致力于还原《吠陀》著作的撰述顺序。古代正统观点与此大相径庭，正如你们对《圣经》的正统见解与现代学者的看法大相径庭一样。《吠陀》分为两个部分：一是《奥义书》，即哲学部分；二是行事部分。 8→ 9→我们将试图略述行事部分。它由仪式与赞歌组成——向各路神灵献唱的种种赞歌。仪式部分由典礼构成，其中某些极为繁琐，需要众多祭司参与。由于典礼的繁复精细，祭司职能本身成为一门独立的学问。渐渐地，关于这些赞歌与仪式的崇敬风气在民间滋长。神灵消失了，留存下来的只是仪式。这是印度奇特的发展。印度正统的印度教徒（即弥曼差学派信徒）并不相信神灵，而那些非正统者则相信神灵。若你问正统的印度教徒，《吠陀》中这些神灵的含义是什么，他便无法给出任何令人满意的答案。祭司们吟唱这些赞歌，向火中倾注供奉与祭品。当你问正统的印度教徒这意味着什么，他说：语词本身具有产生特定效果的力量。仅此而已。一切自然与超自然的力量，皆以此为归宿。《吠陀》不过是一些文字，若发音正确，便具有产生效果的神秘力量。若有一个音节错误，便无效。每一个必须完美无误。因此，在其他宗教中被称为祈祷的东西，在这里消失了，而《吠陀》本身成了神灵。于是你便看到，人们将何等重大的意义赋予《吠陀》的语词。这些是永恒的语词，整个宇宙由此产生。没有语词便不能有思想。所以，这世间的一切，都是思想的显现，而思想唯有通过语词才能彰显自身。这一大量语词——未显现的思想借以显现其自身的媒介——便是所谓的《吠陀》所指。由此可见，一切外在存在皆依赖《吠陀》，因为思想若无语词便不存在。若"马"这个词不存在，便没有人能够想到马。因此，思想、语词与外在对象之间必然存在着密切的关联。这些语词究竟是什么？便是《吠陀》。他们根本不称之为梵语，而称之为吠陀语——神圣的语言。梵语不过是退化的形式，其他一切语言亦然。没有任何语言比吠陀语更为古老。你或许会问："谁写了《吠陀》？"它们并非被书写出来。语词本身即是《吠陀》。一个词若被我正确发音，便是《吠陀》，便会立即产生所求的效果。 10→ 11→这大量《吠陀》永恒存在，整个世界都是这大量语词的显现。当一个宇宙周期终结，这整个能量的显现变得愈来愈精微，最终成为语词，然后成为思想。在下一个宇宙周期中，思想首先转化为语词，然后从那些语词中产生整个宇宙。若此处有某种东西不在《吠陀》之中，那便是你的幻觉，它根本不存在。 12→ 13→仅仅为捍卫《吠陀》这一论题就已著述了无数书籍。若你告诉那些作者，《吠陀》必定首先经由某些人发音，他们只会付之一笑。你从未听说有任何人首次发音《吠陀》。就拿佛陀的话语来说，有一个传说：他曾多次活在世上，多次宣说这些话语。若基督徒站起来说："我的宗教是一种历史性的宗教，因此你们的是错误的，我们的是正确的"，弥曼差学派会回答说："你们的宗教既然是历史性的，你们便承认它是某个人在一千九百年前发明的。凡是真实的，必定是无限而永恒的。这是真理的唯一标准——它永不腐朽，始终如一。你们承认你们的宗教是由某某人创立的。《吠陀》则不然——没有任何先知，没有任何东西……只有无限的语词，其本性即是无限，整个宇宙从中产生又归于其中。"从抽象层面而言，这完全正确。……声音必定是创造的起点。必然存在如同种质一般的种音。没有语词便不能有任何观念。……无论何处有感觉、观念、情感，其中必有语词。困难在于，当他们说这四部书是《吠陀》而别无其他之时。佛教徒便会起而说："我们的也是《吠陀》。它们后来向我们启示。"那不可能。自然不以那种方式运作。自然不会一点一滴地展示其规律——今天一寸引力，明天再一寸。不，每一条规律都是完整的。规律中根本没有演化。它是一劳永逸地给定的。什么"新宗教更好的启示"之类，都是废话，毫无意义。可能有十万条规律，而人类今天只知道其中几条。我们不过是在发现它们而已。那些高唱永恒语词、废黜了神灵的旧祭司们，取代了神灵的位置。他们说："你们不懂语词的力量。我们知道如何运用它们。我们是世界活着的神灵。付钱给我们；我们将操控这些语词，你们便能得到所求的一切。你们自己能发音吗？你们不能，须知，一个错误便会产生相反的效果。你们想要富裕、美貌、长寿、一个好丈夫？"只须付钱给祭司，然后保持安静！ 14→ 15→然而，还有另一面。《吠陀》第一部分的理想与另一部分即《奥义书》的理想，截然不同。第一部分的理想与世界上所有其他宗教（除了吠檀多）的理想相吻合。这一理想是今生与来世的享乐——夫妻、丈夫与子女。付上你的钱，祭司给你一张证书，之后你便能在天堂过上快乐的时光。你在那里能见到你所有的人，这场无尽的欢乐旋转木马将永无止境。无泪水，无哭泣——只有欢笑。无胃痛，却可进食。无头痛，却可宴饮。祭司们认为，这是人类的最高目标。 16→ 17→这一哲学中还有另一种符合你们现代观念的思想。人是自然的奴隶，永远是奴隶。我们称之为业（Karma）。业意味着法则，适用于一切。一切皆受业的约束。"有没有出路？""没有！永远做精美的奴隶吧。我们将操控那些语词，使你只得到一切事物中的好处而非坏处——如果你付给我们足够的钱。"这就是弥曼差学派的理想。这些理想在历朝历代的广大民众中都颇受欢迎。大多数人从不进行真正的思考。即便他们试图思考，那大量迷信所加诸于他们的影响也是极为可怕的。一旦他们软弱下来，一击便来，脊梁骨便折成二十段。他们只能被引诱和威胁所驱动。他们绝无法凭自己的意志行动。他们必须被恐吓、被惊骇、被威慑，然后他们便永远是你的奴隶。他们除了付钱和服从之外别无他事。其他一切由祭司代劳。……宗教变得多么轻松！你们看，你们什么都不必做。回家静坐便是。有人在为你包办一切。可怜的、可怜的生灵！ 18→ 19→与此并驾齐驱，存在着另一个体系。《奥义书》与祭司体系在其一切结论上都截然相反。首先，《奥义书》相信上帝，宇宙的创造者与统治者。你在后来发现了仁慈的天意这一观念。这是一种完全相反的理念。如今，尽管我们聆听祭司的声音，这一理想却要微妙得多。他们将众多神灵归并为一个上帝。 20→ 21→其次，关于一切皆受业力法则约束这一观念，《奥义书》予以承认，但同时指出了出路。人类的目标是超越法则。享乐永远不能成为目标，因为享乐唯有在自性（Prakriti）中才有可能。 22→ 23→第三，《奥义书》谴责一切祭祀，称之为鬼把戏。那或许能给你你所想要的一切，但它并不理想；因为你得到的越多，你想要的越多，你便在一个圆圈中永无止境地打转——享乐与哭泣交替。永恒的幸福这样的东西，在任何地方都是不可能的。那只是孩子的梦。同样的能量，化为欢乐，也化为悲苦。 24→ 25→今天我对自己的心理学有所改变。我发现了一个最奇特的事实。你有某个念头，你不想拥有它，于是你转而想别的事情，那个你想压制的念头便被完全压制了。那是什么念头？我看到它在十五分钟内涌出。它出现了，令我震惊。它很强烈，以如此猛烈、可怕的方式出现，我以为这里有个疯子。而当一切结束，所发生的一切不过是对前一种情绪的压制。涌出的是什么？是我自身那有待宣泄的恶印象。"自性会走自己的路。压制又能奈何？"《博伽梵歌》中有一句可怕的话，仿佛这终究是徒劳的挣扎。你也许在同一时间有十万个冲动在竞争。你可以压制它们，但弹簧一旦反弹，一切又复如故。 26→ 27→然而，希望是有的。若你足够强大，你可以将你的意识同时分化为二十个部分。我在改变自己的心理学。心意在成长。这正是瑜伽（Yoga）行者所说的。有一种激情，它唤醒另一种激情，第一种随之消逝。若你愤怒，然后转为快乐，下一刻愤怒便消散了。从那愤怒中，你制造出了下一种心境状态。这些状态始终是可以相互转化的。永恒的幸福与苦难都是孩子的梦。《奥义书》指出，人类的目标既不是苦难也不是幸福，而是要成为那从中制造出幸福与苦难之物的主人。我们必须在其根本处成为那种情境的主人，仿佛如此。 28→ 29→另一个分歧点是：《奥义书》谴责一切仪式，尤其是那些涉及杀害动物的仪式。它们宣称那一切都是胡闹。一派古代哲学家说，若要产生效果，你必须在特定时间宰杀某种动物。你可以回答说："但是夺取动物生命也有罪过，你将为此受苦。"他们说，那都是废话。你怎么知道什么是对的，什么是错的？你的心意如此说？谁在乎你的心意所说？你在说什么胡话？你在将你的心意凌驾于圣典之上。若你的心意说某事，而《吠陀》说别的，那就停下你的心意，相信《吠陀》。若它们说杀一个人是正当的，那便是正当的。若你说："不，我的良知另有说法"——那行不通。一旦你相信任何书是永恒的话语，是神圣的，你便再不能质疑。我不明白你们如何既相信《圣经》是上帝的话语，又对它的某些内容说："那些话语多么美妙，多么正确，多么善良！"因为，若你相信《圣经》是上帝的话语，你便毫无权利进行评判。一旦你评判，你便认为自己高于《圣经》。那么，《圣经》对你还有什么用呢？祭司们说："我们拒绝与你们的《圣经》或任何人的圣典作比较。比较毫无用处，因为——权威何在？到此为止。若你认为某件事不对，就去按照《吠陀》纠正它。" 30→ 31→《奥义书》也相信这一点，但同时持有更高的标准。一方面，他们不想推翻《吠陀》；另一方面，他们又看到了这些动物祭祀以及祭司们盗取众人钱财的行为。但在心理学上，他们是一致的。所有的分歧都在哲学上——关于灵魂的本质。灵魂是否有身体与心意？而心意是否只是神经的束合，即运动神经与感觉神经？心理学方面，他们都认为是一门完善的科学，不可能有任何差异。一切争论都集中在哲学上——灵魂的本质，以及上帝等等问题。 32→ 33→然后是祭司与《奥义书》之间另一个重大分歧。《奥义书》说：舍离。这是检验一切的标准。舍离一切。是创造的机能将我们带入了这一切的纠缠之中。心意在平静时处于其本然状态。一旦你能使它平静下来，那一刻你便会知晓真理。是什么在旋动心意？是想象力，是创造性的活动。停止创造，你便立刻知晓真理。一切创造的力量必须停止，然后你便立刻知晓真理。 34→ 35→另一方面，祭司们是完全支持创造的。试想一种没有创造性活动的生命形式——那是不可思议的。人们需要有一套使社会稳定发展的方案。采用了一套严格的择优制度。例如，眼盲或跛足之人不得婚配。结果，你会发现印度的残疾现象，比世界上任何其他国家都要少得多。癫痫患者与精神病患者极为罕见。这是直接淘汰的结果。祭司们说："让他们成为桑雅辛（Sannyasin）。"另一方面，《奥义书》说："哦，不，大地上最美好、最优秀、最鲜嫩的花朵，才应献于祭坛之上。强健者、年轻者，心智健全、体魄健全者——他们必须为真理而奋斗。"
1→所以，面对这一切分歧的观点，我已告诉你们，祭司们已将自身分化为一个独立的种姓。第二个是国王的种姓。……所有《奥义书》的哲学，皆出自国王的头脑，而非祭司。每一场宗教斗争的背后，都贯穿着经济利益的争夺。这种名叫人类的动物具有某种宗教影响力，但他的行动受经济利益所支配。个人或许受其他事物的引导，但大多数人类从未有过任何行动，除非其中涉及经济利益。你或许宣扬一种在某些细节上并不完美的宗教，但若其背后有经济基础，又有最热烈的布道者，你便能说服整个国家。…… 2→ 3→每当任何一种宗教取得成功，它必定具有经济价值。数以千计的类似教派将为权力而争斗，但唯有那些切中真正经济问题的才能获得权力。人是由胃袋所引导的。他行走，胃袋在前，头脑在后。你们没有见到这一点吗？头脑走在前面，还需要许多岁月。等到一个人年届六十，他便被召唤离开这个世界。整个人生不过是一场幻梦，而就在你开始如实看待事物的时候，你便被带走了。只要胃袋走在前面，你便一切安好。当孩提的梦幻开始消散，你开始如实看待事物，头脑便走在了前面。就在头脑走在前面之时，你便离去了。 4→ 5→要使《奥义书》的宗教普及化，是一项艰难的任务。其中经济利益甚少，然而利他精神极为深厚。…… 6→ 7→《奥义书》的疆域极为有限，尽管它们是由掌握一切王权的国王所发现的。于是，这场斗争……开始变得愈发激烈。其高潮，在两千年后出现于佛教。佛教的种子就在这里——在国王与祭司之间普通的斗争之中；在这场斗争中，一切宗教都走向衰落。一方要牺牲宗教，另一方要坚守祭祀、吠陀神灵等等。佛教……在瞬息之间打破了民众的枷锁，一切种姓与阶层皆成平等。所以，伟大的宗教理想在印度确实存在，但尚有待宣扬；否则它们不会产生任何益处。…… 8→ 9→在每一个国家，祭司都是保守的，原因有二：一是这是他的衣食，二是他唯有随众而行。并非所有祭司都有强大的意志。若民众说"宣扬两千个神灵"，祭司们便会照做。他们是付钱给他们的会众的仆人。上帝不付钱给他们。所以，在谴责祭司之前，先谴责你自己吧。你只能得到你所配得的政府、宗教与祭司政治，不会更好。 10→ 11→所以，这场伟大的斗争在印度开始了，并在《博伽梵歌》中到达其高潮之一。当时，整个印度似乎将要在这两个对立的群体之间分崩离析，此时奎师那（Krishna）应运而生，在《博伽梵歌》中，他努力调和祭司与民众的仪式与哲学。奎师那受爱戴与崇拜的方式，与你们对基督的方式相同。差别只在时代。印度教徒庆祝奎师那的生日，正如你们庆祝基督诞辰一样。奎师那生活在五千年前，他的一生充满奇迹，其中一些与基督生平中的奇迹极为相似。那孩子在监狱里出生。父亲将他带走，托付给牧羊人。那一年出生的所有孩童，皆被下令诛杀。……他被杀了；那是他的命运。 12→ 13→奎师那是一个已婚之人。关于他的书籍何止千部。这些对我没有太大兴趣。你们知道，印度教徒在讲故事方面极为擅长。若基督教传教士从他们的《圣经》中讲一个故事，印度教徒便会讲出二十个故事。你们说鲸鱼吞了约拿；印度教徒则说某人吞了一头象。……自幼年起，我便听说过奎师那的生平。我认为，必定确有一个名叫奎师那的人存在，而他的《博伽梵歌》表明他留下了一部奇妙的著作。我曾告诉你们，可以通过分析关于一个人的传说来理解其人格。传说的本质如同装饰物，你必须发现它们都经过打磨与加工，以契合这一人格特质。例如，看看佛陀。其中心理念是舍离与牺牲。有数以千计的民间故事，但在每一个故事中，牺牲的主题都必然得以保持。关于林肯，有数以千计的故事，讲述这位伟人的某种特质。你汇集所有传说，找出其共同理念，便能知晓那是这个人的核心人格。你在奎师那身上发现，无执（non-attachment）是核心理念。他无所需求，无所欲望，为工作而工作。"为工作而工作。为礼拜而礼拜。行善是因为行善是好的。别再多问。"那必定是这个人的品格。否则，这些传说不可能被归结为无执这一理念。《博伽梵歌》并非他唯一的说法。…… 14→ 15→他是我所知道的最为全面发展的人，在头脑、心灵与双手上皆奇妙地得到均衡发展。他的每一个时刻都充满活动，或作为绅士，或作为武士，或作为大臣，或扮演其他角色，无不鲜活。作为绅士、作为学者、作为诗人，皆卓越非凡。《博伽梵歌》及其他著作中所见到的这种全面而奇妙的活力、头脑与心灵的结合，令人叹为观止。那颗最奇妙的心灵，那精妙绝伦的语言，世间无物可与之媲美。这个人那惊人的活动力——其印记至今犹存。五千年已然流逝，而他已影响并将继续影响千百万人。试想这个人对全世界产生了何等的影响，无论你是否知晓这一点。我对他的崇敬，源于他完美的清醒。那头脑中没有蜘蛛网，没有迷信。他知晓一切事物的用处，当需要为每件事指定其位置时，他总能做到。那些到处高谈阔论、追问《吠陀》奥秘等等的人，并不知晓真理。他们与骗子无异。在《吠陀》中，甚至为迷信、为无知也有其位置。全部奥秘在于找出每件事物恰当的位置。 16→ 17→再说那颗心灵！他是第一个人——远在佛陀之前——向每一个种姓敞开宗教之门。那奇妙的心灵！那无比活跃的生命！佛陀的活动在一个层面上展开——教化的层面。他无法一边保有妻儿，一边成为教师。奎师那在战场的中央宣讲教义。"在激烈活动的中心保持最大平静，在最大平静中发现激烈活动的人，才是最伟大的瑜伽（Yoga）行者，也是最睿智的人。"对于这个人而言，飞矢横飞于四周，毫无所动。他沉着镇定地继续讨论生死的问题。每一位先知都是对自己教义最好的注脚。若你想知道《新约》某段话的含义，你去找某某先生。但是，反复阅读四部《福音书》，努力在那位伟大主人奇妙生命的光照下理解其深意。伟大的人思考，我们也思考。但有一种差别。我们思考，而我们的身体并不随之行动；我们的行动与思想并不和谐；我们的话语没有成为《吠陀》的那些话语所具有的力量。……他们所想的，必然得以实现。若他们说"我要做这件事"，身体便照做了。完美的服从。这是终极。你可以在一分钟内在心中将自己想成上帝，但你无法成为上帝。那便是困难所在。他们成为他们所想的。我们则只能逐渐成为。 18→ 19→这便是关于奎师那及其时代的大致情况。在下一讲中，我们将进一步认识他的著作。 20→ 21→注释
English
The Gita I
(Delivered in San Francisco, on May 26, 1900)
To understand the Gita requires its historical background. The Gita is a commentary on the Upanishads. The Upanishads are the Bible of India. They occupy the same place as the New Testament does. There are [more than] a hundred books comprising the Upanishads, some very small and some big, each a separate treatise. The Upanishads do not reveal the life of any teacher, but simply teach principles. They are [as it were] shorthand notes taken down of discussion in [learned assemblies], generally in the courts of kings. The word Upanishad may mean "sittings" [or "sitting near a teacher"]. Those of you who may have studied some of the Upanishads can understand how they are condensed shorthand sketches. After long discussions had been held, they were taken down, possibly from memory. The difficulty is that you get very little of the background. Only the luminous points are mentioned there. The origin of ancient Sanskrit is 5000 B.C.; the Upanishads [are at least] two thousand years before that. Nobody knows [exactly] how old they are. The Gita takes the ideas of the Upanishads and in [some] cases the very words. They are strung together with the idea of bringing out, in a compact, condensed, and systematic form, the whole subject the Upanishads deal with.
The [original] scriptures of the Hindus are called the Vedas. They were so vast — the mass of writings — that if the texts alone were brought here, this room would not contain them. Many of them are lost. They were divided into branches, each branch put into the head of certain priests and kept alive by memory. Such men still exist. They will repeat book after book of the Vedas without missing a single intonation. The larger portion of the Vedas has disappeared. The small portion left makes a whole library by itself. The oldest of these contains the hymns of the Rig-Veda. It is the aim of the modern scholar to restore [the sequence of the Vedic compositions]. The old, orthodox idea is quite different, as your orthodox idea of the Bible is quite different from the modern scholar's. The Vedas are divided into two portions: one the Upanishads, the philosophical portion, the other the work portion.
We will try to give a little idea of the work portion. It consists of rituals and hymns, various hymns addressed to various gods. The ritual portion is composed of ceremonies, some of them very elaborate. A great many priests are required. The priestly function became a science by itself, owing to the elaboration of the ceremonials. Gradually the popular idea of veneration grew round these hymns and rituals. The gods disappeared and in their place were left the rituals. That was the curious development in India. The orthodox Hindu [the Mimâmsaka] does not believe in gods, the unorthodox believe in them. If you ask the orthodox Hindu what the meaning is of these gods in the Vedas, [he will not be able to give any satisfactory answer]. The priests sing these hymns and pour libations and offering into the fire. When you ask the orthodox Hindu the meaning of this, he says that words have the power to produce certain effects. That is all. There is all the natural and supernatural power that ever existed. The Vedas are simply words that have the mystical power to produce effects if the sound intonation is right. If one sound is wrong it will not do. Each one must be perfect. [Thus] what in other religions is called prayer disappeared and the Vedas became the gods. So you see the tremendous importance that was attached to the words of the Vedas. These are the eternal words out of which the whole universe has been produced. There cannot be any thought without the word. Thus whatever there is in this world is the manifestation of thought, and thought can only manifest itself through words. This mass of words by which the unmanifested thought becomes manifest, that is what is meant by the Vedas. It follows that the external existence of everything [depends on the Vedas, for thought] does not exist without the word. If the word "horse" did not exist, none could think of a horse. [So] there must be [an intimate relation between] thought, word, and the external object. What are these words [in reality]? The Vedas. They do not call it Sanskrit language at all. It is Vedic language, a divine language. Sanskrit is a degenerate form. So are all other languages. There is no language older than Vedic. You may ask, "Who wrote the Vedas?" They were not written. The words are the Vedas. A word is Veda, if I can pronounce it rightly. Then it will immediately produce the [desired] effect.
This mass of Vedas eternally exists and all the world is the manifestation of this mass of words. Then when the cycle ends, all this manifestation of energy becomes finer and finer, becomes only words, then thought. In the next cycle, first the thought changes into words and then out of those words [the whole universe] is produced. If there is something here that is not in the Vedas, that is your delusion. It does not exist.
[Numerous] books upon that subject alone defend the Vedas. If you tell [their authors] that the Vedas must have been pronounced by men first, [they will simply laugh]. You never heard of any [man uttering them for the first time]. Take Buddha's words. There is a tradition that he lived and spoke these words [many times before]. If the Christian stands up and says, "My religion is a historical religion and therefore yours is wrong and ours is true," [the Mimamsaka replies], "Yours being historical, you confess that a man invented it nineteen hundred years ago. That which is true must be infinite and eternal. That is the one test of truth. It never decays, it is always the same. You confess your religion was created by such-and-such a man. The Vedas were not. By no prophets or anything. ... Only infinite words, infinite by their very nature, from which the whole universe comes and goes." In the abstract it is perfectly correct. ... The sound must be the beginning of creation. There must be germ sounds like germ plasm. There cannot be any ideas without the words. ... Wherever there are sensations, ideas, emotions, there must be words. The difficulty is when they say that these four books are the Vedas and nothing else. [Then] the Buddhist will stand up and say, "Ours are Vedas. They were revealed to us later on." That cannot be. Nature does not go on in that way. Nature does not manifest her laws bit by bit, an inch of gravitation today and [another inch] tomorrow. No, every law is complete. There is no evolution in law at all. It is [given] once and for ever. It is all nonsense, this "new religion and better inspiration," and all that. It means nothing. There may be a hundred thousand laws and man may know only a few today. We discover them — that is all. Those old priests with their tremendous [claims about eternal words], having dethroned the gods, took the place of the gods. [They said], "You do not understand the power of words. We know how to use them. We are the living gods of the world. Pay us; we will manipulate the words, and you will get what you want. Can you pronounce the words yourself? You cannot, for, mind you, one mistake will produce the opposite effect. You want to be rich, handsome, have a long life, a fine husband?" Only pay the priest and keep quiet!
Yet there is another side. The ideal of the first part of the Vedas is entirely different from the ideal of the other part, the Upanishads. The ideal of the first part coincides with [that of] all other religions of the world except the Vedanta. The ideal is enjoyment here and hereafter — man and wife, husband and children. Pay your dollar, and the priest will give you a certificate, and you will have a happy time afterwards in heaven. You will find all your people there and have this merry-go-round without end. No tears, no weeping — only laughing. No stomach-ache, but yet eating. No headache, but yet [parties]. That, considered the priests, was the highest goal of man.
There is another idea in this philosophy which is according to your modern ideas. Man is a slave of nature, and slave eternally he has got to remain. We call it Karma. Karma means law, and it applies everywhere. Everything is bound by Karma. "Is there no way out?" "No! Remain slaves all through the years — fine slaves. We will manipulate the words so that you will only have the good and not the bad side of all — if you will pay [us] enough." That was the ideal of [the Mimamsakas]. These are the ideals which are popular throughout the ages. The vast mass of mankind are never thinkers. Even if they try to think, the [effect of the] vast mass of superstitions on them is terrible. The moment they weaken, one blow comes, and the backbone breaks into twenty pieces. They can only be moved by lures and threats. They can never move of their own accord. They must be frightened, horrified, or terrorised, and they are your slaves for ever. They have nothing else to do but to pay and obey. Everything else is done by the priest. ... How much easier religion becomes! You see, you have nothing to do. Go home and sit quietly. Somebody is doing the whole thing for you. Poor, poor animals!
Side by side, there was the other system. The Upanishads are diametrically opposite in all their conclusions. First of all, the Upanishads believe in God, the creator of the universe, its ruler. You find later on [the idea of a benign Providence]. It is an entirely opposite [conception]. Now, although we hear the priest, the ideal is much more subtle. Instead of many gods they made one God.
The second idea, that you are all bound by the law of Karma, the Upanishads admit, but they declare the way out. The goal of man is to go beyond law. And enjoyment can never be the goal, because enjoyment can only be in nature.
In the third place, the Upanishads condemn all the sacrifices and say that is mummery. That may give you all you want, but it is not desirable, for the more you get, the more you [want], and you run round and round in a circle eternally, never getting to the end — enjoying and weeping. Such a thing as eternal happiness is impossible anywhere. It is only a child's dream. The same energy becomes joy and sorrow.
I have changed my psychology a bit today. I have found the most curious fact. You have a certain idea and you do not want to have it, and you think of something else, and the idea you want to suppress is entirely suppressed. What is that idea? I saw it come out in fifteen minutes. It came out and staggered me. It was strong, and it came in such a violent and terrible fashion [that] I thought here was a madman. And when it was over, all that had happened [was a suppression of the previous emotion]. What came out? It was my own bad impression which had to be worked out. "Nature will have her way. What can suppression do?" That is a terrible [statement] in the Gita. It seems it may be a vain struggle after all. You may have a hundred thousand [urges competing] at the same time. You may repress [them], but the moment the spring rebounds, the whole thing is there again.
[But there is hope]. If you are powerful enough, you can divide your consciousness into twenty parts all at the same time. I am changing my psychology. Mind grows. That is what the Yogis say. There is one passion and it rouses another, and the first one dies. If you are angry, and then happy, the next moment the anger passes away. Out of that anger you manufactured the next state. These states are always interchangeable. Eternal happiness and misery are a child's dream. The Upanishads point out that the goal of man is neither misery nor happiness, but we have to be master of that out of which these are manufactured. We must be masters of the situation at its very root, as it were.
The other point of divergence is: the Upanishads condemn all rituals, especially those that involve the killing of animals. They declare those all nonsense. One school of old philosophers says that you must kill such an animal at a certain time if the effect is to be produced. [You may reply], "But [there is] also the sin of taking the life of the animal; you will have to suffer for that." They say that is all nonsense. How do you know what is right and what is wrong? Your mind says so? Who cares what your mind says? What nonsense are you talking? You are setting your mind against the scriptures. If your mind says something and the Vedas say something else, stop your mind and believe in the Vedas. If they say, killing a man is right, that is right. If you say, "No, my conscience says [otherwise," it won't do]. The moment you believe in any book as the eternal word, as sacred, no more can you question. I do not see how you people here believe in the Bible whenever you say about [it], "How wonderful those words are, how right and how good!" Because, if you believe in the Bible as the word of God, you have no right to judge at all. The moment you judge, you think you are higher than the Bible. [Then] what is the use of the Bible to you? The priests say, "We refuse to make the comparison with your Bible or anybody's. It is no use comparing, because — what is the authority? There it ends. If you think something is not right, go and get it right according to the Vedas."
The Upanishads believe in that, [but they have a higher standard too]. On the one hand, they do not want to overthrow the Vedas, and on the other they see these animal sacrifices and the priests stealing everybody's money. But in the psychology they are all alike. All the differences have been in the philosophy, [regarding] the nature of the soul. Has it a body and a mind? And is the mind only a bundle of nerves, the motor nerves and the sensory nerves? Psychology, they all take for granted, is a perfect science. There cannot be any difference there. All the fight has been regarding philosophy — the nature of the soul, and God, and all that.
Then another great difference between the priests and the Upanishads. The Upanishads say, renounce. That is the test of everything. Renounce everything. It is the creative faculty that brings us into all this entanglement. The mind is in its own nature when it is calm. The moment you can calm it, that [very] moment you will know the truth. What is it that is whirling the mind? Imagination, creative activity. Stop creation and you know the truth. All power of creation must stop, and then you know the truth at once.
On the other hand, the priests are all for [creation]. Imagine a species of life [in which there is no creative activity. It is unthinkable]. The people had to have a plan [of evolving a stable society. A system of rigid selection was adopted. For instance,] no people who are blind and halt can be married. [As a result] you will find so much less deformity [in India] than in any other country in the world. Epileptics and insane [people] are very rare [there]. That is owing to direct selection. The priests say, "Let them become Sannyâsins." On the other hand, the Upanishads say, "Oh no, [the] earth's best and finest [and] freshest flowers should be laid upon the altar. The strong, the young, with sound intellect and sound body — they must struggle for the truth."
So with all these divergences of opinion, I have told you that the priests already differentiated themselves into a separate caste. The second is the caste of the kings. ... All the Upanishadic philosophy is from the brains of kings, not priests. There [runs] an economic struggle through every religious struggle. This animal called man has some religious influence, but he is guided by economy. Individuals are guided by something else, but the mass of mankind never made a move unless economy was [involved]. You may [preach a religion that may not be perfect in every detail], but if there is an economic background [to it], and you have the most [ardent champions] to preach it, you can convince a whole country. ...
Whenever any religion succeeds, it must have economic value. Thousands of similar sects will be struggling for power, but only those who meet the real economic problem will have it. Man is guided by the stomach. He walks and the stomach goes first and the head afterwards. Have you not seen that? It will take ages for the head to go first. By the time a man is sixty years of age, he is called out of [the world]. The whole of life is one delusion, and just when you begin to see things the way they are, you are snatched off. So long as the stomach went first you were all right. When children's dreams begin to vanish and you begin to look at things the way they are, the head goes. Just when the head goes first, [you go out].
[For] the religion of the Upanishads to be popularised was a hard task. Very little economy is there, but tremendous altruism. ...
The Upanishads had very little kingdom, although they were discovered by kings that held all the royal power in their hands. So the struggle ... began to be fiercer. Its culminating point came two thousand years after, in Buddhism. The seed of Buddhism is here, [in] the ordinary struggle between the king and the priest; and [in the struggle] all religion declined. One wanted to sacrifice religion, the other wanted to cling to the sacrifices, to Vedic gods, etc. Buddhism ... broke the chains of the masses. All castes and creeds alike became equal in a minute. So the great religious ideas in India exist, but have yet to be preached: otherwise they do no good. ...
In every country it is the priest who is conservative, for two reasons — because it is his bread and because he can only move with the people. All priests are not strong. If the people say, "Preach two thousand gods," the priests will do it. They are the servants of the congregation who pay them. God does not pay them. So blame yourselves before blaming the priests. You can only get the government and the religion and the priesthood you deserve, and no better.
So the great struggle began in India and it comes to one of its culminating points in the Gita. When it was causing fear that all India was going to be broken up between [the] two ... [groups], there rose this man Krishna, and in the Gita he tries to reconcile the ceremony and the philosophy of the priests and the people. Krishna is loved and worshipped in the same way as you do Christ. The difference is only in the age. The Hindus keep the birthday of Krishna as you do Christ's. Krishna lived five thousand years ago and his life is full of miracles, some of them very similar to those in the life of Christ. The child was born in prison. The father took him away and put him with the shepherds. All children born in that year were ordered to be killed. ... He was killed; that was his fate.
Krishna was a married man. There are thousands of books about him. They do not interest me much. The Hindus are great in telling stories, you see. [If] the Christian missionaries tell one story from their Bible, the Hindus will produce twenty stories. You say the whale swallowed Jonah; the Hindus say someone swallowed an elephant. ... Since I was a child I have heard about Krishna's life. I take it for granted there must have been a man called Krishna, and his Gita shows he has [left] a wonderful book. I told you, you can understand the character of a man by analysing the fables about him. The fables have the nature [of decorations]. You must find they are all polished and manipulated to fit into the character. For instance, take Buddha. The central idea [is] sacrifice. There are thousands of folklore, but in every case the sacrifice must have been kept up. There are thousands of stories about Lincoln, about some characteristic of that great man. You take all the fables and find the general idea and [know] that that was the central character of the man. You find in Krishna that non-attachment is the central idea. He does not need anything. He does not want anything. He works for work's sake. "Work for work's sake. Worship for worship's sake. Do good because it is good to do good. Ask no more." That must have been the character of the man. Otherwise these fables could not be brought down to the one idea of non-attachment. The Gita is not his only sermon. ...
He is the most rounded man I know of, wonderfully developed equally in brain and heart and hand. Every moment [of his] is alive with activity, either as a gentleman, warrior, minister, or something else. Great as a gentleman, as a scholar, as a poet. This all-rounded and wonderful activity and combination of brain and heart you see in the Gita and other books. Most wonderful heart, exquisite language, and nothing can approach it anywhere. This tremendous activity of the man — the impression is still there. Five thousand years have passed and he has influenced millions and millions. Just think what an influence this man has over the whole world, whether you know it or not. My regard for him is for his perfect sanity. No cobwebs in that brain, no superstition. He knows the use of everything, and when it is necessary to [assign a place to each], he is there. Those that talk, go everywhere, question about the mystery of the Vedas, etc., they do not know the truth. They are no better than frauds. There is a place in the Vedas [even] for superstition, for ignorance. The whole secret is to find out the proper place for everything.
Then that heart! He is the first man, way before Buddha, to open the door of religion to every caste. That wonderful mind! That tremendously active life! Buddha's activity was on one plane, the plane of teaching. He could not keep his wife and child and become a teacher at the same time. Krishna preached in the midst of the battlefield. "He who in the midst of intense activity finds himself in the greatest calmness, and in the greatest peace finds intense activity, that is the greatest [Yogi as well as the wisest man]." It means nothing to this man — the flying of missiles about him. Calm and sedate he goes on discussing the problems of life and death. Each one of the prophets is the best commentary on his own teaching. If you want to know what is meant by the doctrine of the New Testament, you go to Mr. So-and-so. [But] read again and again [the four Gospels and try to understand their import in the light of the wonderful life of the Master as depicted there]. The great men think, and you and I [also] think. But there is a difference. We think and our bodies do not follow. Our actions do not harmonise with our thoughts. Our words have not the power of the words that become Vedas. ... Whatever they think must be accomplished. If they say, "I do this," the body does it. Perfect obedience. This is the end. You can think yourself God in one minute, but you cannot be [God]. That is the difficulty. They become what they think. We will become [only] by [degrees].
You see, that was about Krishna and his time. In the next lecture we will know more of his book.
Notes
文本来自Wikisource公共领域。原版由阿德瓦伊塔修道院出版。