佛教化的印度
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
佛教时代的印度
（一九〇〇年二月二日于加利福尼亚州帕萨迪纳莎士比亚俱乐部讲演）
今晚我们的主题是佛教时代的印度。诸位中或许大多数人已读过阿诺德爵士关于佛陀（Buddha）生平的长诗，其中一些人或许怀着更为严谨的学术兴趣研究过这一课题，因为英语、法语和德语均有相当丰富的佛学文献。佛教本身是最引人入胜的课题之一，因为它是世界宗教历史上第一次有据可查的大规模兴起。在佛教诞生之前，印度及其他地方早已存在伟大的宗教，但这些宗教或多或少局限于各自的民族之内。古代印度教徒、古代犹太人、古代波斯人，各自都拥有伟大的宗教，然而这些宗教大体上都是民族性的。佛教是第一个以征服世界为己任、大胆进行宗教传播的宗教。抛开其教义、所传真理与所负使命不论，我们面对的是人类历史上规模最为宏大的变革之一。在佛陀诞生后短短数百年间，佛陀赤足剃发的传教僧侣已遍布当时所有已知的文明世界，甚至更远——从北方的拉普兰直至南方的菲律宾群岛。在佛陀降生后数百年内，佛教便广泛传播；而在印度本土，佛教曾一度几乎吞没三分之二的人口。
然而整个印度从未完全皈依佛教，旧有的印度教始终屹立其外。佛教的命运与基督教对于犹太人的命运如出一辙：大多数犹太人置身其外，古老的印度宗教得以延续。然而两者的相似仅止于此。基督教虽未能将所有犹太民族纳入怀中，却征服了整片土地。犹太人的古老宗教在极短时间内被基督教所取代，古老宗教从此散落于世界各处，犹太人的宗教以零星方式存活于世界各地。而在印度，这个巨大的孩子在漫长岁月中被哺育它的母亲重新吸收，时至今日，佛陀之名在印度几乎已无人知晓。诸位对佛教的了解，远超过百分之九十九的印度人。在印度，人们最多只知道这样一句话——"哦，他是一位伟大的先知，是神的伟大化身"——仅此而已。锡兰岛依然属于佛陀，喜马拉雅山麓某些地区还留存着少数佛教徒，除此之外，印度境内再无佛教的踪影。然而佛教已传遍亚洲其余所有地区。
尽管如此，佛教仍拥有所有宗教中最多的信众，并在潜移默化中影响了所有其他宗教的教义。佛教大量渗入小亚细亚。彼时曾有一段时期，佛教徒与后起的基督徒各派系之间争斗不息。早期基督教的诺斯替派（Gnostics）及其他派别，其倾向或多或少带有佛教色彩，所有这些思想都在那座神奇的城市亚历山大港汇融，最终在罗马法律的框架下孕育出基督教。佛教在政治和社会层面的意义，甚至比其教义与教条更为引人深思；作为宗教征服世界这一巨大力量的最初爆发，它同样具有极为重要的意义。
在这次演讲中，我最感兴趣的是印度如何受到佛教的影响；为了对佛教及其兴起有所了解，我们需要对这位伟大先知降生之时的印度有一番认识。
当时的印度已有一部规模庞大、体系完备的宗教经典——吠陀（Vedas）；这部吠陀作为一整套文献流传，而非一部单一的书籍——正如你们所见的旧约圣经一样。圣经是不同时代的大量文献汇集，出于不同作者之手，诸如此类；它是一部文集。吠陀同样是一部规模宏大的文集。我不知道，即便所有文本都被找到——至今没有人找到全部文本，即便在印度，也没有人见过所有的书——若所有典籍齐全，这间屋子能否容纳得下。这是一部浩瀚的文献，一代又一代地从神那里传承下来，神赐予了这部经典。印度对经典的看法极为保守正统，令人叹为观止。你们抱怨自己的书崇拜教条主义，若你们了解印度教徒的观念，不知将作何感想？印度教徒认为吠陀是神的直接启示，神通过吠陀创造了整个宇宙，而整个宇宙之所以存在，乃是因为它存在于吠陀之中。牛之所以在外部世界存在，是因为"牛"这个词存在于吠陀之中；人之所以在外部世界存在，是因为吠陀中有这个词。这里我们看到了一种理论的滥觞，后来基督徒将其发展并表述为："太初有道，道与神同在。"这是印度古老而悠久的理论。整个经典观念都建立于其上。请注意，每一个词语都是神的力量。词语不过是在物质层面的外在显现。因此，所有这一切显现都只是物质层面的显现；而这个词语就是吠陀，梵文（Sanskrit）是神的语言。神只说过一次话，他用梵文说话，那是神圣的语言。他们认为，其他一切语言不过是驴鸣而已；为了表示这一点，他们称所有不讲梵文的民族为"蔑戾车"（Mlechchhas），这与希腊人称他者为野蛮人是同一个词。他们是在嘶叫，不是在说话；梵文才是神圣的语言。
吠陀并非任何人所著；它与神永恒共存。神是无限的，知识亦是无限的，世界就是通过这一知识而被创造出来的。他们的伦理观念是：一件事之所以善，乃是因为法律如此规定。一切都以那部经典为界限——没有什么能超越它，因为神的知识——你无法超越那一知识。这就是印度的正统观念。
在吠陀的后半部分，你们可以看到最高的、最具灵性的内容。在较早的部分，有些内容较为粗糙。你引用吠陀中的一段话，说"这不好"，"为什么呢？""这里有一条明确的恶规"——和你们在旧约中所见到的一样。所有古老典籍中都有许多奇特的思想，以今日眼光来看殊为不妥。你说："这个教义完全不好；它冒犯了我的伦理！"然而你的伦理观念从何而来？仅仅凭借你自己的思考吗？滚开！若这是神所命定的，你有什么权利质疑？当吠陀说"不可如此，这是不道德的"等等，你就再没有任何权利质疑。这就是困难之所在。若你告诉一个印度教徒："但我们的圣经不是这样说的"，他会回答："哦，你们的圣经！它在历史上不过是个婴孩。除了吠陀，还能有什么其他的圣经？其他的书算什么？神的一切知识都在吠陀之中。你的意思是说，他另外用两部或多部圣经来教导吗？他的知识在吠陀中已经彰显。你的意思是说他犯了错误，后来又想改进，再去教导另一个民族另一部圣经？你拿不出任何一部书与吠陀一样古老。其余一切——都是照着吠陀抄写的。"他们根本不听你的。而基督徒带来圣经，他们说："那是伪造的。神只说一次，因为他从不犯错。"
请设想一下。那种保守正统实在令人望而生畏。若你告诉一个印度教徒，他应该改革社会、做这做那，他会说："这在经典中有记载吗？若没有，我不打算改变。你等着吧，再过五百年，你会发现这是对的。"若你告诉他"你们的某个社会制度是不对的"，他会说："你凭什么这样说？"接着他会说："我们这方面的社会制度更好。等五百年，你们的制度就会消亡。检验的标准是适者生存。你们活着，但世界上没有一个共同体能连续存在五百年。看这里！我们一直都在。"这就是他们的说法。多么可怕的保守正统！感谢上苍，我已经渡过了那片大海。
这就是印度的保守正统。除此之外还有什么？整个社会被分割成种姓——正如今日所见，只是当时更为严格——一切都被种姓所划分。还有另一件事值得了解：西方此时也有形成种姓的趋势。而我本人——我是一个叛逆者。我已打破了一切。就个人而言，我不相信种姓制度。种姓制度确有其可取之处。但对我自己而言，愿主帮助我！若他帮助我，我宁愿不要任何种姓。你们明白我所说的种姓是什么意思，而你们都在努力快速建立它。在印度教徒那里，它是世袭的职业。印度教徒在古时候认为，生活应当变得更轻松、更顺畅。是什么让一切充满活力？竞争。世袭职业会扼杀活力。你是木匠？很好，你的儿子只能是木匠。你是铁匠？铁匠成为一个种姓，你的子女将成为铁匠。我们不允许任何外人进入这一行业，所以你会安于现状，留在那里。你是军人、武士？组成一个种姓。你是祭司？组成一个种姓。祭司职位世代相传。诸如此类，严格而强制。这有其伟大之处，即它实际上拒绝了竞争。正是种姓制度使这个民族得以延续，而其他民族早已消亡。然而其弊端亦十分巨大：它压制了个性。我将不得不当木匠，因为我生来就是木匠的儿子；但我并不喜欢这一行。这是写在经典中的，这一切在佛陀诞生之前便已如此。我现在讲述的是佛陀出世之前的印度。而今日你们所呼唤的社会主义！好的东西会到来，但从长远来看，你们将是这个种族的祸害。自由才是真正的旗帜。要自由！身体自由、心灵自由、灵魂自由！这是我一生所感受到的；我宁可在自由中行恶，也不愿在束缚中行善。
好吧，西方如今所呼吁的那些事情，他们在数千年前就已经历过了。土地已被国有化……成千上万的这类事情。这都应归咎于这种僵化的种姓制度。印度人民极具社会主义精神。但在那之外，还有丰富的个人主义。他们同样具有强烈的个人主义倾向——也就是说，在制定了所有这些繁琐规定之后。他们规定了你应如何饮食、睡眠、死亡！一切都有规定；从清晨起床到夜晚就寝，你始终遵循着规定和法律。法律，法律。你们会奇怪一个民族怎能在这样的环境下生存吗？法律即死亡。一个国家的法律越多，这个国家就越糟糕。若想成为真正的个体，我们需要去山野之中，那里没有法律，没有政府。你们制定越多的法律、越多的警察和社会主义，不法之徒就会越多。如今这种铺天盖地的法律规制便是如此。孩子一出生，就知道自己生来便是奴隶：首先是种姓的奴隶，其次是国家的奴隶。奴隶，奴隶，奴隶。每一个行为——他的饮水、他的饮食。他必须按照固定的方式进食；吃第一口时诵这个祷词，吃第二口时诵那个祷词，吃第三口时诵另一个祷词，喝水时诵另一个祷词。试想一下！就这样，日复一日，周而复始。
然而他们是思想家。他们知道，这一切并不会带来真正的伟大。因此，他们为所有人留了一条出路。他们发现，所有这些规定只是为了世间生活而设。一旦你不再渴求钱财，不再渴望子嗣——不再有世俗的牵挂——你便可以完全自由地离去。这些出离者被称为游方僧（Sannyasin）——放弃世俗者。他们从未组织自己，现在也没有；他们是一个自由的男女群体，拒绝婚娶，拒绝拥有财产，没有任何法律约束他们——甚至连吠陀都不能约束他们。他们凌驾于吠陀之上。他们处于社会制度的另一个极端。他们已经超越了种姓。他们心怀博大，不受这些微末规条的束缚。他们只需遵守两件事：不得拥有财产，不得婚娶。若你婚娶、安家落户或拥有财产，各种规定立刻便会降临于你；但若你两者皆不为，你便是自由的。他们是这个民族的活着的神灵，百分之九十九的伟大男女都出自他们之中。
在每一个国家，灵魂的真正伟大意味着卓越的个性，而这种个性是你在社会中无法获得的。它在社会中焦躁不安，渴望冲破社会的桎梏。若社会想要压制它，那个灵魂便想将社会打得粉碎。而印度人开辟了一条便捷的通道。他们说："好吧，一旦你脱离社会，你便可以随心所欲地传教讲道。我们只是从远处敬拜你。"于是出现了那些卓绝的个体男女，他们在整个社会中地位最高。若其中一位身着黄袍、剃度剃发者到来，即便是王侯也不敢在其面前就坐；他必须起立。下半个时辰，这位游方僧或许正站在某户最贫寒人家的茅舍门口，只求得一块面包果腹。他必须与各阶层的人交往混处；今日他与穷人同眠于茅屋，明日便躺在国王华美的床榻之上。某一天他在王宫中以金盘用膳，次日却一无所食，睡在大树之下。社会对这些人充满敬重；其中一些人为了彰显个性，会试图颠覆世俗观念。但只要他们坚守这两条原则，百姓便不会受到震动：至纯的德行与不置财产。
这些人具有强烈的个体意识，他们始终在尝试新理论、新方案——游历四方。他们必须思考新事物，不能在旧轨道中打转。其他所有人都试图让我们循着旧轨运行，强迫我们以同样的方式思考。然而人性远比人类的任何愚行更为强大。我们的伟大超越我们的软弱，善的力量强过恶的力量。假设他们成功地使我们都在同一轨道上思考，那我们便真的完了——再无思想可言，我们将走向死亡。
这是一个几乎毫无生机的社会，其成员被铁链般的法律压制。他们被迫相互帮助。彼时一个人置身于铺天盖地的规定之下：规定了如何呼吸，如何洗手洗脸，如何沐浴，如何刷牙，直至临终之时。而在这些规定之外，是游方僧那令人惊叹的个人主义。他就在那里。每一天，在这些意志坚强的个体男女之中，都会有新的派别兴起。古代梵文典籍中记载着他们脱颖而出的事迹——其中有一位女性，是古代一位极为奇特的老妇人，她总有新奇之举；有时受到批评，但人们总是对她又敬又畏，悄然服从。古代便有如此这般的伟大男女。
在这个被规定所压制的社会中，权力掌握在祭司阶层手中。在社会等级中，最高的种姓便是祭司阶层，而这是一门职业——我找不到更好的词语，所以才使用"祭司"这个词。这与此地的含义并不相同，因为我们的祭司并非传授宗教或哲学的人。祭司的职责是执行所有那些被规定下来的繁琐细节。祭司是在这些规定中提供协助的人。他为你主持婚礼；他在你的葬礼上诵经。因此，凡是对一个男人或女人举行的所有仪式，祭司必须在场。在社会中，婚姻是最高的理想。每一个人都必须成婚。这是规定。没有婚姻，男人便无法举行任何宗教仪式；他只是半个人，没有资格主持仪式——甚至祭司本人，若不婚娶，也无法以祭司身份主持仪式。在社会中，半个人是不适格的。
祭司的权力因此大为膨胀。……我们国家立法者的总体方针是赋予祭司这种荣誉。他们同样推行了一种社会主义式的计划，约束祭司不得敛财。其动机为何？社会荣誉。请注意，世界各地的祭司在社会等级中都处于最高位置，在印度尤为如此，以至于最贫寒的婆罗门（Brahmin）从出身上讲，也高于国中最伟大的国王。他是印度的贵族阶层。但法律不允许他变得富裕。法律将他打入贫困——只是赋予他荣誉。他有千百件事情不能做；种姓在社会等级中越高，其享乐所受的限制就越多。种姓越高，一个人能够食用的食物种类就越少，能够食用的食物数量就越少，能够从事的职业种类就越少。对你们而言，他的生活只不过是一连串永无止境的磨难。这是在饮食及一切方面进行的永恒修炼；而对较低种姓的一切要求，对较高种姓则要加倍苛求十倍。最低阶层的人说谎，罚款一美元；婆罗门则必须支付一百美元——因为他理应知道得更清楚。
然而这一体制最初是一个宏大的组织。后来时过境迁，这些祭司们开始将所有权力尽握于手；最终，他们忘记了其权力的根本秘密：贫穷。他们本是社会供养衣食之人，以便他们专心研学、传道、思考。然而他们却开始将双手伸向社会的财富，变成了——借用你们的说法——"敛财者"，将这一切全都忘却了。
其次是武士种姓，即王族武士阶层。实际权力掌握在他们手中。不仅如此——印度所有伟大思想家几乎毫无例外地出自这一种姓，而非婆罗门。这是颇为奇特之处。我们所有的伟大先知，几乎无一例外，都属于武士种姓。伟大的克里希纳（Krishna）亦属此种姓，罗摩（Rama）亦然，我们所有的伟大哲学家几乎全都曾高坐王座；一切呼唤弃绝世俗的声音，皆从王座上发出。这些武士阶层既是国王，又是哲学家；他们是奥义书（Upanishads）中的言说者。在才智与思想上，他们超越了祭司，也更为强大有力——他们是国王，然而祭司却掌握了全部权力，并试图凌驾于他们之上。于是，祭司与国王这两个种姓之间的政治竞争，就此持续上演。
还有另一个现象。曾来听第一讲的诸位已经知道，印度有两大种族：一称雅利安人（Aryan），另一称非雅利安人。三个种姓属于雅利安种族；而其余所有人则被冠以一个统一的名称——首陀罗（Shudras），即无种姓阶层。他们根本不是雅利安人。（许多人来自印度以外，他们发现了首陀罗——这片土地上的土著。）不管情形如何，这些庞大的非雅利安人群体及其混血后裔，逐渐走向文明，开始争取与雅利安人相同的权利。他们希望进入雅利安人的学校和学院；他们希望佩戴雅利安人的神圣圣线；他们希望举行与雅利安人相同的仪式，并希望在宗教和政治上享有与雅利安人平等的权利。而婆罗门祭司则是反对这些主张的最大力量。在每一个国家，祭司天性最为保守，此乃自然之理。只要这是一门职业，就必然如此；保守对他们而言有着切身的利益。于是，雅利安范围之外涌动的诉求浪潮，祭司们竭尽全力试图压制。而在雅利安范围之内，也存在着声势浩大的宗教变革运动，且大多由武士种姓所引领。
当时已存在耆那教（Jain）派别——它在今日印度依然是一股保守力量，是一个极为古老的派别。他们宣称印度教经典——吠陀——无效。他们自己撰写了一些典籍，并宣称："我们的典籍才是唯一的原始典籍，唯一的原始吠陀；而今日流传的那些被称为吠陀的典籍，乃是婆罗门为欺骗人民而伪造的。"他们也提出了同样的计划。你们明白，面对印度教徒关于经典的论证，实属不易。他们同样声称世界是通过那些典籍创造的。他们的著作以民间语言写成。梵文在那时便已不再是口语——它与口语之间的关系，就如同拉丁语与现代意大利语的关系。于是他们将所有著作写成巴利文（Pali）；当婆罗门说"为何你们的典籍是用巴利文写的！"时，他们回答说："梵文是死人的语言。"
他们的方法和方式各有不同。因为，印度教经典——吠陀——是大量积累的浩瀚文献，其中部分内容较为粗糙，直至有关宗教的那一部分，才专讲灵性。而那正是所有这些派别声称要宣讲的吠陀内容。古代吠陀有三个步骤：第一，行动（业力—Karma的工作）；第二，礼拜；第三，知识（智慧—Jnana）。当一个人通过行动与礼拜净化自身，神便在那个人的内心之中。他已认识到神早已在那里。他只是能够看见神，因为心（Chitta）已变得纯净。心可以通过行动与礼拜而净化，如此而已。解脱（Moksha）本已具足。我们只是不知道。因此，行动、礼拜与知识乃是三个步骤。所谓行动，是指为他人行善。这当然有其意义，但就婆罗门而言，行动主要是指举行这些繁琐的仪式：宰杀牛只、宰杀公牛、宰杀山羊以及各种动物，活生生地投入烈火之中，诸如此类。耆那教宣称："这根本算不上行动，因为伤害他人绝不可能是善事"；他们进而说："这就是你们吠陀是伪造吠陀的证明，是祭司们制造出来的，因为没有哪部善书会命令我们宰杀动物并做这些事情。你们自己也不信。所以你们在吠陀中所见到的一切屠宰动物之举，都是婆罗门所写，因为只有他们从中获益。只有祭司将钱财装入囊中，扬长而去。因此，这一切都是祭司的把戏。"
他们的教义之一是：根本不存在神，"祭司们发明了神，以便人们相信神并向他们奉献钱财。一派胡言！根本没有神。存在的只有自然与灵魂，仅此而已。灵魂陷入这一生命的纠缠之中，被你们所谓的身体这件外衣所裹覆。现在，行善吧。"然而由此自然而然地推导出这样一个教义：一切物质都是卑鄙的。他们是苦行（Tapas）教义的最早倡导者。若身体是不净的结果，那么身体便是卑鄙的。若一个人单腿站立一段时间——"很好，这是一种惩罚"。若头部碰壁——"欢喜吧，这是极好的惩罚"。方济各会（Franciscan Order）的某些伟大创始人中——其中一位是圣方济各（St. Francis）——曾同行前往某地拜访某人；圣方济各带着一位同伴，他们开始讨论那个人是否会接待他们，同伴提出他或许会拒绝接纳。圣方济各说："这还不够，兄弟，即使我们前去叩门，那人出来将我们驱走，也还不够。但若他命人将我们捆绑并痛打一顿，即便那样也还不够。若他将我们手脚五花大绑，将我们打得浑身流血，再将我们丢在门外的雪地里，那才算足够了。"
那时正盛行着这类苦行思想。耆那教徒是最早的苦行实践者；但他们也完成了一些伟大的工作。"不伤害任何人，并尽力行善于一切众生，这便是一切道德与伦理，这便是所有应当做的事，其余一切不过是无稽之谈——婆罗门创造了那些东西，统统摒弃。"他们随即着手将这一原则贯穿始终，加以精心阐发，这是最为奇妙的理想：他们如何从不杀生（Ahimsa）这一伟大原则中推演出一切我们所称之为伦理的内容。
这一派别至少比佛陀早五百年，而佛陀在基督前五百五十年。他们将整个动物界分为五类：最低等者只有一种感官，即触觉；其次有触觉与味觉；再次有触觉、味觉与听觉；更高者有触觉、味觉、听觉与视觉；最高者则具备五种感官。最低的一感官生物与二感官生物肉眼不可见，遍布于水中。伤害这些低等生命是件极为严重的事。现代世界的细菌学在过去二十年内方才兴起，所以以前没有人了解这些。他们说，最低等的动物只有触觉这一种感官，没有其他。次等的也是肉眼不可见的。他们早已知道，若将水煮沸，这些动物便会死亡。因此，这些僧侣即便渴死，也决不会通过饮水而杀死这些动物。但若他们站在你的门口，你给了他一些煮沸的水，杀死动物的罪过便算在你身上，而他将获得功德。他们将这些理念推向近乎荒谬的极端。例如，在摩擦身体的时候——若他沐浴——他将不得不杀死大量微生物；所以他从不沐浴。他甘愿被这些生命所侵染，他说这没有关系。生命对他而言无足轻重；他甘愿被侵染，以保全其他生命。
耆那教徒就是这样存在的。还有各种各样的苦行派别；在此情形下，一方面存在着祭司与国王之间的政治竞争，另一方面各种各样心存不满的派别在各处如雨后春笋般涌现。还有一个更大的问题：大批民众渴望获得与雅利安人相同的权利，在自然永恒流淌的泉流旁因渴而死，却无权喝一口水。
就在这时，那个伟人降生了——伟大的佛陀（Buddha）。他的生平，诸位大多有所了解。尽管各种神迹与传说通常会附着在任何一位伟人身上，但首先，他是世界上最具历史实证性的先知之一。有两位先知具有高度的历史实证性：其中年代最为久远的是佛陀，另一位是穆罕默德（Mohammed），因为朋友与敌人对他们的记载都是一致的。所以我们完全可以确定，确实存在过这样的人物。至于其他先知，我们只能信赖弟子们的说法——仅此而已。我们的克里希纳（Krishna）——印度教的先知——是颇具神话色彩的。他生平的大部分事迹及一切关于他的记载，皆出自弟子之手；而且有时看来，似有三四个人物都融为一体。我们对许多先知的了解并不那么清晰；但对于这个人，由于朋友与敌人都对他有所记述，我们可以确信历史上曾存在过这样一个真实的人物。若我们穿越所有附着于一位伟人身上的传说、神迹记载和故事，便会发现一个内在的核心；纵览他的所有记载，可以看出他从未做过任何一件出于私利的事——从未！你们如何知道这一点？因为当传说被附会于一个人身上时，传说必然带有该人整体性格的印记。没有一则传说试图将任何恶行或不道德的事情归于此人。甚至他的敌人也留下了对他有利的记述。
据说佛陀降生时，他是如此纯净，以至于任何人从远处望见他的面容，便立即放弃了仪式宗教，遁入空门，从而得救。于是众神召开会议，他们说："我们完了。"因为大多数神灵都依赖仪式祭祀为生。这些供品奉献于神灵，而这些供品都消失了。神灵因饥饿而痛苦，是因为他们的权力已然消逝。于是众神说："我们必须想办法压制这个人。他对我们的生存而言太过纯净了。"神灵们随即前来，说道："大人，我们有事相求。我们想举行一场盛大的祭祀，燃起熊熊大火，我们遍寻世界，寻找一处洁净之地来点燃这火堆，却一无所获，而今终于找到了。若您肯俯卧，我们将把这熊熊大火建在您的胸口之上。"他说："好，去做吧。"众神在佛陀胸口上堆起高高的火焰，他们以为他已死去，然而他并未死去。众神随后四处奔走，说："我们完了。"所有神灵都开始击打他，毫无用处。他们无法将他杀死。从火焰之下，传来一个声音："为何做出这些徒劳无益的举动？""无论谁望向您都会得到净化和救度，再没有人会崇拜我们了。""那么，你们的企图是徒劳的，因为纯净永远不可能被消灭。"这则传说出自他的敌人之手，然而纵观整则传说，归咎于佛陀的唯一"罪过"，不过是他是如此伟大的一位纯净导师（Guru）。
关于他的教义，诸位有些人略有了解。正是他的教义吸引了许多你们所称的不可知论的现代思想家。他是人类兄弟情谊的伟大宣扬者："无论雅利安人还是非雅利安人，无论有无种姓，无论有无门派，每一个人都有平等接近神、接触宗教、追求自由的权利。你们都来吧。"然而在其他方面，他十分倾向于不可知论的立场。"要务实。"一日，五位出身婆罗门的青年男子前来，他们正就某个问题争论不休。他们来请教他真理之路。其中一人说："我的族人如此教导，这便是通往真理的道路。"另一人说："我是这样被教导的，这是通往真理的唯一道路。""先生，哪条路才是正确的？""好，你说你的族人教导你这是真理，是通往神的道路？""是的。""但你见过神吗？""没有，先生。""你的父亲？""没有，先生。""你的祖父？""没有，先生。""他们中没有一人见过神？""没有。""那么你的老师——他们也没有一人见过神？""没有。"他对其他人也问了同样的问题。他们都承认没有人见过神。佛陀说："在某个村子里，来了一个年轻人，哭哭啼啼，号啕大哭：'哦，我是如此爱她！哦，我是如此爱她！'村民们聚拢过来；而他所说的唯一一句话就是他如此深爱她。'你爱的她是谁？''我不知道。''她住在哪里？''我不知道'——但他是如此深爱她。'她长什么样子？''那我不知道；但哦，我是如此深爱她。'"佛陀随后问道："年轻人，你们如何评价这个年轻人？""先生，他是个傻瓜！"他们都宣称："先生，那个年轻人肯定是个傻瓜，为了一个女人哭哭啼啼，说是如此深爱她，却从未见过她，也不知道她是否存在，甚至对她一无所知？""你们难道不正是如此吗？你们说，这位连你们的父亲或祖父都从未见过的神，如今你们却为一件你们和你们的祖先从未知晓的事情争论不休，甚至试图割断彼此的喉咙。"随后那些青年问道："那我们应该怎么做？""告诉我：你们的父亲曾教导说神会发怒吗？""没有，先生。""你们的父亲曾教导说神是邪恶的吗？""没有，先生，他永远是纯洁的。""那么现在，若你们纯洁善良、诸事俱备，你们岂不认为这比争论这一切、试图割断彼此的喉咙，更有机会接近那个神吗？因此，我说：要纯洁，要善良；要纯洁，爱一切众生。"仅此而已。
你们可以看到，不杀害动物和对动物慈悲，是他出生之前便已存在的教义；但他带来了全新的东西——打破种姓制度这场声势浩大的运动。另一件全新的事情是：他挑选了四十位弟子，将他们派往世界各地，说："去吧；与所有种族和民族融合，传播这卓越的福音，为众生的利益，为一切人的福祉。"当然，他并未受到印度教徒的骚扰，寿终正寝。他一生都是一个极为严格的人，从不向软弱屈服。我并不赞同他的许多教义；这当然是实情。我认为，古代印度教徒的吠檀多（Vedanta）哲学更为深邃，是更为宏伟的人生哲学。我欣赏他的工作方式，但我最欣赏这个人的是：在人类所有的先知中，他是一位头脑中从无蛛网的人，清醒而刚强。当诸多王国皆臣服于他脚下，他依然是那个不变的人，坚守着"我是芸芸众生中的一个凡人"这一信念。
印度教徒是极度渴望崇拜某人的。诸位若久居其地，会发现我也将被我们的人民所崇拜。若你去那里传教，你死去之前便会被崇拜。他们总是试图崇拜某人。而生活在那个民族之中，举世敬仰的佛陀，在临终时始终宣称自己只是一个凡人。他那些顶礼膜拜的崇拜者，没有一个人能从他口中引出哪怕一句话，证明他与其他任何人有任何不同。
他临终前的那些话语，始终震动着我的心。他已年迈，正在病苦中，死亡将临，这时来了一个被轻贱的贱民——他以腐肉、死去的动物为生；印度教徒不允许这类人进入城市——这个贱民邀请他赴宴，他携弟子前往。贫苦的旃陀罗（Chanda）想要用他认为最好的方式款待这位伟大的导师；因此他准备了大量猪肉和米饭，佛陀看着这一切。弟子们都在踌躇，大师说："好，你们不必吃，以免有损健康。"但他静静地坐下，吃了起来。平等的导师必须吃贱民旃陀罗的饭，哪怕是猪肉。他坐下，吃了。
他已病入膏肓，感到死亡将至，他说："给我在这棵树下铺些东西，因为我想终点已近。"他就在那棵树下，躺了下来；他再也无法坐起。他做的第一件事，就是说："去告诉旃陀罗，他是我最大的恩人之一；因为他的那顿饭，我将趋向涅槃（Nirvana）。"随后几个人前来求教，一位弟子说："现在不要靠近，大师正在离去。"大师听闻后立刻说："让他们进来。"又有人前来，弟子们不予放行。再次有人来，这时垂死的大师说："阿难陀（Ananda）啊，我正在离去。不要为我哭泣，不要为我操心。我已逝去，要勤勉地修证你们自己的解脱（Moksha）。你们每一个人，与我并无不同。我不过是你们中的一员。我今日之所成，皆是我自己造就的。你们也要努力奋斗，将自己塑造成我这样的人……"
这是佛陀的不朽话语："不要因为一部古老的书被奉为权威便轻信。不要因为你的父亲说你应当相信便轻信。不要因为与你相似的人都相信便轻信。检验一切，试验一切，然后才去相信；若你发现它有益于众多人，便将它传授给所有人。"说完这些话，大师安然离去。
看看这个人的神志多么清明。没有神灵，没有天使，没有鬼神——一切皆无。什么都没有。刚毅、清醒，每一个脑细胞都完好无损，即便在临终之刻。没有任何幻觉。我并不赞同他的许多教义，诸位或许也不赞同。但在我看来——哦，若我能拥有哪怕一滴那样的力量！他是这个世界所见过的最为清醒的哲学家，是最优秀、最清醒的导师。而那个人从未向婆罗门那压迫性的权力低头，从未。他始终直截了当，处处如一：与悲苦者同悲，帮助悲苦者；与歌唱者同歌唱，与刚强者同刚强；处处都是那个清醒而能干的人。
当然，尽管如此，我也无法完全理解他的教义。他否认人身中存在任何灵魂——即印度教意义上的灵魂。我们印度教徒都相信，人身中有一种永恒不变的东西，贯穿永恒而存在。在人身中，我们称之为真我（Atman，即阿特曼），无始无终。我们同样相信，自然中存在一种永恒的东西，我们称之为梵（Brahman），亦无始无终。他否定了这两者。他说，没有任何证据证明有任何永恒的东西存在。一切不过是变化的洪流；你所谓的心灵，是处于持续变化中的一团思想。……火炬引领着游行队伍前行，圆圈不过是幻觉。或者以一条河流为例，它是一条持续流淌的河流；每一刻，新的水团不断流过。生命如此，身体如此，心灵亦如此。
这一教义，我无法理解——我们印度教徒从未真正理解它。但我能理解其背后的动机。哦，那是何等宏大的动机！这位大师说，自私乃是世间最大的诅咒；我们是自私的，这正是诅咒之所在。不应存在任何自私的动机。你们犹如一条持续流淌的河流——一个持续的现象。没有神；没有灵魂；站稳双脚，行善，只因行善本身而行善——既不为惧怕惩罚，也不为前往某处。神志清明，无所动机地伫立。动机唯一：我想行善，行善本身就是善。何等震撼！何等震撼！我对他的形而上学毫无共鸣；但当我想到这道德力量之时，我内心满怀嫉羡。请问问你们自己，你们中有哪一个人能像那个人一样，站立一个小时，既有能力，又有胆识？我连五分钟也做不到。我会变成懦夫，渴求某种支撑。我是软弱的——是懦夫。一想到这位宏伟的巨人，我便心生敬畏。我们无法接近那种力量。世界从未见过与那种力量相媲美的东西，我也从未见过任何其他类似的力量。我们生来都是懦夫。若我们能自保，我们便别无所求。内心深处始终存在着巨大的恐惧、巨大的动机。我们自身的自私使我们成为最彻头彻尾的懦夫；我们自身的自私是恐惧与懦弱的最大根源。而他屹立于那里："行善，只因行善本身；无需追问更多；这已足够。一个被寓言、故事或迷信驱使而行善的人，一旦机会来临，他便会行恶。只有为了善本身而行善的人，才是真正的善人，那便是人的品格。"
"人之中还剩下什么？"有人问大师。"一切——一切。但人身中有什么？不是肉体，不是灵魂，而是品格。而品格将传承万古，历久不衰。所有曾经存在过、已然逝去的人，都将他们的品格留给了我们，这是留给人类其余部分的永恒财富；而这些品格正在发挥着作用——贯穿始终，不断发挥着作用。"佛陀何所遗？拿撒勒的耶稣何所遗？世界充满了他们的品格。何等震撼的教义！
让我们稍微回落一些——我们甚至还没有真正进入主题。（笑声。）今晚我还必须再补充几句话……
他做了什么。他的工作方式：组织化。你们今日所具有的教会理念，正是他的性格所体现的。他留下了教会。他将僧侣们组织起来，使他们成为一个整体。甚至以投票方式决议这一做法，早在基督前五百六十年便已存在。组织之细密令人叹为观止。教会就此建立，成为一股巨大的力量，在印度及印度以外开展了声势浩大的传教事业。此后约三百年，即基督前两百年，出现了伟大的阿育王（Asoka）——你们西方历史学家称之为最神圣的君王——此人完全皈依了佛陀的思想，是当时世界上最伟大的君王。他的祖父是亚历山大大帝的同时代人，自亚历山大时代起，印度与希腊的联系便日趋密切。……每天在中亚地区都有铭文被发现。印度对佛陀、阿育王以及所有这些人物，早已忘却殆尽。但各处矗立着石柱、方尖碑、立柱，上刻无人能读懂的古代文字。某些古代莫卧儿皇帝曾宣称，愿意出百万酬谢能读通这些文字者，然而无人能够。在过去三十年间，这些文字终于被解读；它们全都用巴利文写成。
第一则铭文写道："……"
继而他写下这则铭文，描述战争的恐惧与苦难；随后他皈依了宗教。他说："从今以后，让我的后代中没有任何人想着通过征服其他民族来赢得荣耀。若他们想要荣耀，就让他们帮助其他民族；让他们派遣科学教师和宗教教师。通过刀剑赢得的荣耀，根本算不上荣耀。"接着你们会发现，他甚至向亚历山大港派遣了传教士……你们会惊讶地发现，在那一地区立即涌现出各种派别，被称为塔拉皮人（Theraputae）、爱色尼人（Essenes）等，都是极端素食主义者，诸如此类。这位伟大的阿育王皇帝为人与动物修建了医院。铭文显示，他下令修建了供人与动物使用的医院。也就是说，当一头动物年老，若我贫穷，无力再养，我不必将它安乐死。这些医院由公众慈善维持，沿海商贾按每百斤售出的货物缴纳一定费用，所有这些款项均归医院所用，因此没有人受到侵扰。若你有一头年迈的牛——任何动物——不想再养，便送往医院；他们照看它，哪怕是老鼠和任何你送去的生物。只是，有时候我们的女眷会无意间害死这些动物，你们知道的。她们大群结伴前去探望，带着各种糕点；动物们有时就因这些食物而丧命。他主张，动物应与人一样，得到政府的保护。为何动物应被允许遭受宰杀？没有任何理由。但他说，在禁止为食物而宰杀动物之前，必须先为民众提供各种蔬菜。于是他收集了各种蔬菜，在印度广泛种植；待这些蔬菜推广之后，命令颁布：此后，凡宰杀动物者将受到惩处。一个政府应当是真正的政府，动物也必须受到保护。一个人为了食物而宰杀一头牛、一只羊或其他任何动物，有何道理可言？
由此，佛教在印度成为了一股巨大的政治力量。它逐渐也走向分崩离析——毕竟，这是一项规模极为浩大的传教事业。但值得称道的是，他们从未以刀剑来传播宗教。除了佛教之外，世界上没有任何一种宗教能够不流血地前进哪怕一步——没有哪种宗教能够仅凭脑力便赢得十万信众。不，从来没有。贯穿始终都是如此。而这正是你们打算在菲律宾所做的事情。那是你们的方式。以刀剑使他们信仰宗教。这正是你们的祭司所鼓吹的内容。征服并消灭他们，以便他们能够获得宗教信仰。这是多么奇妙的传教方式！
你们知道这位伟大的阿育王皇帝是如何皈依的。这位伟大的皇帝年轻时并非那般仁善。他有一位兄弟，兄弟二人起了争执，另一位兄弟打败了他，皇帝出于复仇之心，欲将其杀死。皇帝得知他已向一位佛教僧侣寻求庇护。我已告诉过你们，我们的僧侣是多么神圣，没有人会轻易靠近他们。皇帝亲自前往，他说："把那人交给我。"随后那位僧侣向他说法："复仇是恶劣的。以爱消弭愤怒。愤怒无法以愤怒治愈，仇恨无法以仇恨克服。以爱化解愤怒，以爱消除仇恨。朋友，若你以一恶报另一恶，你不能治愈第一个恶，只会在世间再添一恶。"皇帝说："这说的不错，你这个傻瓜。你是否准备好了交出自己的生命——为那个人献出你的生命？""准备好了，陛下。"他走了出来。皇帝拔出宝剑，说："准备好了吗。"就在他举剑欲砍之际，他望向那人的脸。那双眼睛毫无眨动。皇帝停了下来，他说："告诉我，僧侣，你这个穷叫化子，你从哪里学来了不眨眼的这股力量？"那位僧侣再次说法。"继续说吧，僧侣，"皇帝说，"说得好，"他说。就这样，皇帝逐渐被那位大师——佛陀的魅力所征服。
佛教有三件法宝：佛陀本人、他的法（Dharma）、他的僧团（Sangha）。起初是如此简单。当大师临终之际，在他离世之前，他们说："我们应该如何安置您？""无需任何。""我们应该在您的墓上建立什么纪念物？"他说："若你们有心，就堆一个小土丘吧，或者什么都不做。"渐渐地，出现了宏伟的寺庙和一切法器庄严。使用佛像，在此之前是不为人知的。我说他们是最早使用佛像的人。到处都是佛陀和一切圣徒的佛像，坐而祈祷。所有这些法器庄严随着这一组织的发展而不断增加。随后，这些寺院变得富裕。衰亡的真正根源正在于此。对于少数人而言，出家修行固然极好；但若你如此宣扬，以至于每一个有意于此的男男女女立即抛弃社会生活，当你发现整个印度遍布寺院，有些寺院驻有十万名僧侣，有时一座建筑内就有两万名僧侣——这些宏伟壮观的寺院遍布印度各地，当然也是学问的中心，诸如此类——那么，究竟谁来繁衍后代，延续民族的血脉？只有体弱者留了下来。所有意志坚强、生机勃发的心智都离去了。于是民族的衰败由于一股单纯的活力丧失而到来。
我要告诉你们这一奇妙的兄弟情谊。它是伟大的。然而理论与理想是一回事，实际运作又是另一回事。这一理想是非常崇高的：实践不抵抗及一切，但若我们所有人都走上街头实践不抵抗，这座城市里所剩无几。也就是说，理想是正确的，但至今没有人找到一个实际的解决方案，说明如何实现它。
种姓制度在血统方面有其合理之处；遗传这样的事物确实存在。现在试着理解——为何你们不将血统与黑人、美洲印第安人混融？自然不允许你这样做。自然不允许你们将血统与他们混融。这是保护种族的无意识运作。那就是雅利安人的种姓制度。请注意，我并不是说他们不与我们平等。他们必须享有相同的特权、利益和一切；但我们知道，若某些种族相互融合，他们便会退化。随着雅利安人与非雅利安人之间严格的种姓壁垒被在一定程度上打破，成群的异族人带着他们所有奇特的迷信、习俗和风尚涌入。试想一下：衣着简陋，以腐肉为食，等等。但在他们身后跟来的是他们的拜物教、人祭、迷信与邪魔崇拜。他们将这一切藏在身后，在头几年间表现得还算体面。此后他们将一切都摆到了台面上。这使整个民族退化。随后血统融合，各种难以融合的种族发生了联姻。民族由此衰落。然而从长远来看，这被证明是有益的。若你们与黑人和美洲印第安人融合，这一文明固然会衰落。但数百年之后，从这一融合之中将诞生一个更为强大的伟大民族；只是在此期间，你们必须忍受苦难。印度教徒相信——这是一种特殊的信仰，我以为如此；对此我没有任何评论，也没有发现任何相反的证据——他们相信，只有一个文明的种族：雅利安人。除非他献出自己的血统，没有任何其他种族能够被文明化。教育单靠自身无法做到。雅利安人将血统给予一个种族，那个种族便得以文明化。仅凭教导是不够的。以你们国家为例：你们愿意将自己的血统献给黑人种族吗？那样他便能获得更高的文化。
印度教徒热爱种姓制度。我或许也带着一丝这种偏见的痕迹——我不知道。我热爱大师的理想，那是伟大的。但就我个人而言，我不认为这一实践运作得非常切实；而这正是从长远来看导致印度民族衰亡的重大原因之一。然而这一切带来了这场宏大的融合。如此众多不同的种族都在融合、混合——一个人像你们一样白皙，或呈黄色，而另一个人像我一样黝黑，在这两个极端之间有各种肤色，每个种族保持着各自的习俗、礼仪与一切——从长远来看，一场融合正在发生，由此融合之中必然涌现出一股巨大的力量；然而在此期间，那个巨人必须沉睡。这便是所有此类融合的结果。
当佛教以那种方式衰落之时，不可避免的反弹便随之而来。世间万物只有一个本体，这是一个统一的世界。差异只不过是感官层面的幻象。一切都是同一的。统一的理念，以及我们所称的不二（Advaita）——无有二元对立——正是印度的核心理念。这一教义在印度从来不曾缺席；每当唯物主义与怀疑主义将一切摧毁之时，它便被重新提出。当佛教通过引入各种异族蛮夷进入印度——连同他们的习俗、风尚与种种事物——而将一切破坏殆尽之后，反弹随之而来。这场反弹由一位年轻的僧侣商羯罗（Shankaracharya）所引领。他不是宣扬新教义，不是时刻思考新思想、建立新派别，而是将吠陀重新带回人间；于是现代印度教便成为古代印度教与吠陀精神的融合，其中吠檀多（Vedanta）占据主导地位。然而你们看，已经死去的东西永远无法复活，印度教那些仪式从此再未复活。若我告诉你们，按照古代仪式，一个不吃牛肉的印度教徒并非真正的印度教徒，你们会感到震惊；在某些场合他必须献祭一头公牛并将其吃掉。这在今日令人作呕。然而不管他们彼此之间有多少分歧，在这一点上所有印度人都是一致的——他们从不吃牛肉。古代的祭祀与古代的神灵，都已一去不复返；现代印度归属于吠陀的灵性部分。
佛教是印度的第一个宗派。他们是最早说"我们是唯一正道"的人。在基督前五百六十年，投票表决制度便已存在。组织之细密令人叹为观止。他们说："直到你加入我们的教会，才能得救。"那就是他们所说的："这才是正道。"然而因为身上流着印度教的血，他们无法成为其他国家那样心肠冷酷的宗派分子。终会有你们的救赎：没有人会永远走入歧途。不，不。他们身上流着太多的印度教血统，做不到那样。那颗心不是那么铁石心肠的。但你必须加入他们。
然而印度教的理念，你们知道，并不是要求任何人加入任何团体。无论你身在何处，那便是你通往中心之路的出发点。很好。印度教——吠陀精神——有这样一个优势：它的秘密在于教义与教条并不意味着一切；重要的是你究竟是一个怎样的人。即便你口若悬河，讲述世界上所有最好的哲学，若你在行为上是个蠢人，这一切都不算数；而若你在行为上是善良的，你便有更多的机会。既然如此，吠檀多主义者便能耐心等待所有人。吠檀多主义教导说，宇宙间只有一个存在，一个真实之物，那就是梵（Brahman）。它超越一切时间、空间、因果及一切。我们永远无法界定它，除了说它是绝对的存在、绝对的知识、绝对的喜乐之外，我们无以言说。他是唯一的实在。他是一切事物的实在；是你、是我、是这堵墙、是处处万象的实在。我们一切知识皆依赖于他的知识；我们一切欢乐皆依赖于他的喜乐；而他是唯一的实在。当人认识到这一点，他便知道："我是唯一的实在，因为我即是他——我身中真实的东西也是他。"因此，当一个人完全纯洁、完全善良、超越一切粗鄙之时，他便如同耶稣所悟到的那样发现："我与我的父原为一体。"吠檀多主义者有耐心等待所有人。无论你身在何处，这是最高的境界："我与我的父原为一体。"去实现它。若一尊圣像有助于你，圣像便是受欢迎的。若崇拜一位伟人有助于你，就去崇拜他。若礼拜穆罕默德有助于你，继续吧。只要诚心诚意；若你诚心诚意，吠檀多主义说，你必定会被引向目标。没有人会被遗落。你的心，那颗蕴含一切真理的心，将一章一章地展开，直至你认识到最后的真理："我与我的父原为一体。"而得救是什么？与神同在。在哪里？任何地方。就在此刻，就在这里。无限时间中的任何一刻，与任何其他时刻同样美好。这便是古老吠陀的教义，你们看到了。这一教义被重新振兴。佛教在印度消逝了。它在印度留下了它的印记——它的慈悲，对动物的关怀，等等；而吠檀多主义正在从印度一端到另一端重新征服印度。
注释
English
BUDDHISTIC INDIA
(Delivered at the Shakespeare Club, Pasadena, California, on February 2, 1900)
Buddhistic India is our subject tonight. Almost all of you, perhaps, have read Edwin Arnold's poem on the life of Buddha, and some of you, perhaps, have gone into the subject with more scholarly interest, as in English, French and German, there is quite a lot of Buddhistic literature. Buddhism itself is the most interesting of subjects, for it is the first historical outburst of a world religion. There have been great religions before Buddhism arose, in India and elsewhere, but, more or less, they are confined within their own races. The ancient Hindus or ancient Jews or ancient Persians, every one of them had a great religion, but these religions were more or less racial. With Buddhism first begins that peculiar phenomenon of religion boldly starting out to conquer the world. Apart from its doctrines and the truths it taught and the message it had to give, we stand face to face with one of the tremendous cataclysms of the world. Within a few centuries of its birth, the barefooted, shaven-headed missionaries of Buddha had spread over all the then known civilised world, and they penetrated even further — from Lapland on the one side to the Philippine Islands on the other. They had spread widely within a few centuries of Buddha's birth; and in India itself, the religion of Buddha had at one time nearly swallowed up two-thirds of the population.
The whole of India was never Buddhistic. It stood outside. Buddhism had the same fate as Christianity had with the Jews; the majority of the Jews stood aloof. So the old Indian religion lived on. But the comparison stops here. Christianity, though it could not get within its fold all the Jewish race, itself took the country. Where the old religion existed — the religion of the Jews — that was conquered by Christianity in a very short time and the old religion was dispersed, and so the religion of the Jews lives a sporadic life in different parts of the world. But in India this gigantic child was absorbed, in the long run, by the mother that gave it birth, and today the very name of Buddha is almost unknown all over India. You know more about Buddhism than ninety-nine per cent of the Indians. At best, they of India only know the name — "Oh, he was a great prophet, a great Incarnation of God" — and there it ends. The island of Ceylon remains to Buddha, and in some parts of the Himalayan country, there are some Buddhists yet. Beyond that there are none. But [Buddhism] has spread over all the rest of Asia.
Still, it has the largest number of followers of any religion, and it has indirectly modified the teachings of all the other religions. A good deal of Buddhism entered into Asia Minor. It was a constant fight at one time whether the Buddhists would prevail or the later sects of Christians. The [Gnostics] and the other sects of early Christians were more or less Buddhistic in their tendencies, and all these got fused up in that wonderful city of Alexandria, and out of the fusion under Roman law came Christianity. Buddhism in its political and social aspect is even more interesting than its [doctrines] and dogmas; and as the first outburst of the tremendous world-conquering power of religion, it is very interesting also.
I am mostly interested in this lecture in India as it has been affected by Buddhism; and to understand Buddhism and its rise a bit, we have to get a few ideas about India as it existed when this great prophet was born.
There was already in India a vast religion with an organised scripture — the Vedas; and these Vedas existed as a mass of literature and not a book — just as you find the Old Testament, the Bible. Now, the Bible is a mass of literature of different ages; different persons are the writers, and so on. It is a collection. Now, the Vedas are a vast collection. I do not know whether, if the texts were all found — nobody has found all the texts, nobody even in India has seen all the books — if all the books were known, this room would contain them. It is a huge mass of literature, carried down from generation to generation from God, who gave the scriptures. And the idea about the scriptures in India became tremendously orthodox. You complain of your orthodoxies in book-worship. If you get the Hindus' idea, where will you be? The Hindus think the Vedas are the direct knowledge of God, that God has created the whole universe in and through the Vedas, and that the whole universe exists because it is in the Vedas. The cow exists outside because the word "cow" is in the Vedas; man exists outside because of the word in the Vedas. Here you see the beginning of that theory which later on Christians developed and expressed in the text: "In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God " It is the old, ancient theory of India. Upon that is based the whole idea of the scriptures. And mind, every word is the power of God. The word is only the external manifestation on the material plane. So, all this manifestation is just the manifestation on the material plane; and the Word is the Vedas, and Sanskrit is the language of God. God spoke once. He spoke in Sanskrit, and that is the divine language. Every other language, they consider, is no more than the braying of animals; and to denote that they call every other nation that does not speak Sanskrit [Mlechchhas], the same word as the barbarians of the Greeks. They are braying, not talking, and Sanskrit is the divine language.
Now, the Vedas were not written by anybody; they were eternally coexistent with God. God is infinite. So is knowledge, and through this knowledge is created the world. Their idea of ethics is [that a thing is good] because the law says so. Everything is bounded by that book — nothing [can go] beyond that, because the knowledge of God — you cannot get beyond that. That is Indian orthodoxy.
In the latter part of the Vedas, you see the highest, the spiritual. In the early portions, there is the crude part. You quote a passage from the Vedas — "That is not good", you say. "Why?" "There is a positive evil injunction" — the same as you see in the Old Testament. There are numbers of things in all old books, curious ideas, which we would not like in our present day. You say: "This doctrine is not at all good; why, it shocks my ethics!" How did you get your idea? [Merely] by your own thought? Get out! If it is ordained by God, what right have you to question? When the Vedas say, "Do not do this; this is immoral", and so on, no more have you the right to question at all. And that is the difficulty. If you tell a Hindu, "But our Bible does not say so", [he will reply] "Oh, your Bible! it is a babe of history. What other Bible could there be except the Vedas? What other book could there be? All knowledge is in God. Do you mean to say that He teaches by two or more Bibles? His knowledge came out in the Vedas. Do you mean to say that He committed a mistake, then? Afterwards, He wanted to do something better and taught another Bible to another nation? You cannot bring another book that is as old as Vedas. Everything else — it was all copied after that." They would not listen to you. And the Christian brings the Bible. They say: "That is fraud. God only speaks once, because He never makes mistakes."
Now, just think of that. That orthodoxy is terrible. And if you ask a Hindu that he is to reform his society and do this and that, he says: "Is it in the books? If it is not, I do not care to change. You wait. In five [hundred] years more you will find this is good." If you say to him, "This social institution that you have is not right", he says, "How do you know that?" Then he says: "Our social institutions in this matter are the better. Wait five [hundred] years and your institutions will die. The test is the survival of the fittest. You live, but there is not one community in the world which lives five hundred years together. Look here! We have been standing all the time." That is what they would say. Terrible orthodoxy! And thank God I have crossed that ocean.
This was the orthodoxy of India. What else was there? Everything was divided, the whole society, as it is today, though in a much more rigorous form then — divided into castes. There is another thing to learn. There is a tendency to make castes just [now] going on here in the West. And I myself — I am a renegade. I have broken everything. I do not believe in caste, individually. It has very good things in it. For myself, Lord help me! I would not have any caste, if He helps me. You understand what I mean by caste, and you are all trying to make it very fast. It is a hereditary trade [for] the Hindu. The Hindu said in olden times that life must be made easier and smoother. And what makes everything alive? Competition. Hereditary trade kills. You are a carpenter? Very good, your son can be only a carpenter. What are you? A blacksmith? Blacksmithing becomes a caste; your children will become blacksmiths. We do not allow anybody else to come into that trade, so you will be quiet and remain there. You are a military man, a fighter? Make a caste. You are a priest? Make a caste. The priesthood is hereditary. And so on. Rigid, high power! That has a great side, and that side is [that] it really rejects competition. It is that which has made the nation live while other nations have died — that caste. But there is a great evil: it checks individuality. I will have to be a carpenter because I am born a carpenter; but I do not like it. That is in the books, and that was before Buddha was born. I am talking to you of India as it was before Buddha. And you are trying today what you call socialism! Good things will come; but in the long run you will be a [blight] upon the race. Freedom is the watchword. Be free! A free body, a free mind, and a free soul! That is what I have felt all my life; I would rather be doing evil freely than be doing good under bondage.
Well, these things that they are crying for now in the West, they have done ages before there. Land has been nationalised . . . by thousands all these things. There is blame upon this hide-bound caste. The Indian people are intensely socialistic. But, beyond that, there is a wealth of individualism. They are as tremendously individualistic — that is to say, after laying down all these minute regulations. They have regulated how you should eat, drink, sleep, die! Everything is regulated there; from early morning to when you go to bed and sleep, you are following regulations and law. Law, law. Do you wonder that a nation should [live] under that? Law is death. The more of the law in a country, the worse for the country. [But to be an individual] we go to the mountains, where there is no law, no government. The more of law you make, the more of police and socialism, the more of blackguards there are. Now this tremendous regulation of law [is] there. As soon as a child is born, he knows that he is born a slave: slave to his caste, first; slave to his nation, next. Slave, slave, slave. Every action - his drinking and his eating. He must eat under a regular method; this prayer with the first morsel, this prayer with the second, that prayer with the third, and that prayer when he drinks water. Just think of that! Thus, from day to day, it goes on and on.
But they were thinkers. They knew that this would not lead to real greatness. So they left a way out for them all. After all, they found out that all these regulations are only for the world and the life of the world. As soon as you do not want money [and] you do not want children — no business for this world — you can go out entirely free. Those that go out thus were called Sannyasins — people who have given up. They never organised themselves, nor do they now; they are a free order of men and women who refuse to marry, who refuse to possess property, and they have no law — not even the Vedas bind them. They stand on [the] top of the Vedas. They are [at] the other pole [from] our social institutions. They are beyond caste. They have grown beyond. They are too big to be bound by these little regulations and things. Only two things [are] necessary for them: they must not possess property and must not marry. If you marry, settle down, or possess property, immediately the regulations will be upon you; but if you do not do either of these two, you are free. They were the living gods of the race, and ninety-nine per cent of our great men and women were to be found among them.
In every country, real greatness of the soul means extraordinary individuality, and that individuality you cannot get in society. It frets and fumes and wants to burst society. If society wants to keep it down, that soul wants to burst society into pieces. And they made an easy channel. They say: "Well, once you get out of society, then you may preach and teach everything that you like. We only worship you from a distance. So there were the tremendous, individualistic men and women, and they are the highest persons in all society. If one of those yellow-clad shaven-heads comes, the prince even dare not remain seated in his presence; he must stand. The next half hour, one of these Sannyasins might be at the door of one of the cottages of the poorest subjects, glad to get only a piece of bread. And he has to mix with all grades; now he sleeps with a poor man in his cottage; tomorrow [he] sleeps on the beautiful bed of a king. One day he dines on gold plates in kings' palaces; the next day, he has not any food and sleeps under a tree. Society looks upon these men with great respect; and some of them, just to show their individuality, will try to shock the public ideas. But the people are never shocked so long as they keep to these principles: perfect purity and no property.
These men, being very individualistic, they are always trying new theories and plans — visiting in every country. They must think something new; they cannot run in the old groove. Others are all trying to make us run in the old groove, forcing us all to think alike. But human nature is greater than any human foolishness. Our greatness is greater than our weakness; the good things are stronger than the evil things. Supposing they succeeded in making us all think in the same groove, there we would be — no more thought to think; we would die.
Here was a society which had almost no vitality, its members pressed down by iron chains of law. They were forced to help each other. There, one was under regulations [that were] tremendous: regulations even how to breathe: how to wash face and hands; how to bathe; how to brush the teeth; and so on, to the moment of death. And beyond these regulations was the wonderful individualism of the Sannyasin. There he was. And every days new sect was rising amongst these strong, individualistic men and women. The ancient Sanskrit books tell about their standing out — of one woman who was very quaint, queer old woman of the ancient times; she always had some new thing; sometimes [she was] criticised, but always people were afraid of her, obeying her quietly. So, there were those great men and women of olden times.
And within this society, so oppressed by regulations, the power was in the hands of the priests. In the social scale, the highest caste is [that of] the priest, and that being a business — I do not know any other word, that is why I use the word "priest". It is not in the same sense as in this country, because our priest is not a man that teaches religion or philosophy. The business of a priest is to perform all these minute details of regulations which have been laid down The priest is the man who helps in these regulations. He marries you; to your funeral he comes to pray. So at all the ceremonies performed upon a man or a woman, the priest must be there. In society the ideal is marriage. [Everyone] must marry. It is the rule. Without marriage, man is not able to perform any religious ceremony; he is only half a man; [he] is not competent to officiate — even the priest himself cannot officiate as a priest, except he marries. Half a man is unfit within society.
Now, the power of the priests increased tremendously. . . . The general policy of our national law-givers was to give the priests this honour. They also had the same socialistic plan [you are] just ready to [try] that checked them from getting money. What [was] the motive? Social honour. Mind you, the priest in all countries is the highest in the social scale, so much so in India that the poorest Brahmin is greater than the greatest king in the country, by birth. He is the nobleman in India. But the law does not allow him ever to become rich. The law grinds him down to poverty — only, it gives him this honour. He cannot do a thousand things; and the higher is the caste in the social scale, the more restricted are its enjoyments. The higher the caste, the less the number of kinds of food that man can eat, the less the amount of food that man may eat, the less the number of occupations [he may] engage in. To you, his life would be only a perpetual train of hardships — nothing more than that. It is a perpetual discipline in eating, drinking, and everything; and all [penalties] which are required from the lower caste are required from the higher ten times more. The lowest man tells a lie; his fine is one dollar. A Brahmin, he must pay, say, a hundred dollars — [for] he knows better.
But this was a grand organisation to start with. Later on, the time came when they, these priests, began to get all the power in their hands; and at last they forgot the secret of their power: poverty. They were men whom society fed and clad so that they might simply learn and teach and think. Instead of that, they began to spread out their hands to clutch at the riches of society. They became "money-grabbers" — to use your word — and forgot all these things.
Then there was the second caste, the kingly caste, the military. Actual power was in their hands. Not only so — they have produced all of our great thinkers, and not the Brahmins. It is curious. All our great prophets, almost without one exception, belong to the kingly caste. The great man Krishna was also of that caste; Rama, he also, and all our great philosophers, almost all [sat] on the throne; thence came all the great philosophers of renunciation. From the throne came the voice that always cried, "Renounce". These military people were their kings; and they [also] were the philosophers; they were the speakers in the Upanishads. In their brains and their thought, they were greater than the priests they were more powerful, they were the kings - and yet the priests got all the power and: tried to tyrannise over them. And so that was going on: political competition between the two castes, the priests and the kings.
Another phenomenon is there. Those of you that have been to hear the first lecture already know that in India there are two great races: one is called the Aryan; the other, the non-Aryan. It is the Aryan race that has the three castes; but the whole of the rest are dubbed with one name, Shudras — no caste. They are not Aryans at all. (Many people came from outside of India, and they found the Shudras [there], the aborigines of the country). However it may be, these vast masses of non-Aryan people and the mixed people among them, they gradually became civilised and they began to scheme for the same rights as the Aryans. They wanted to enter their schools and their colleges; they wanted to take the sacred thread of the Aryans; they wanted to perform the same ceremonies as the Aryans, and wanted to have equal rights in religion and politics like the Aryans. And the Brahmin priest, he was the great antagonist of such claims. You see, it is the nature of priests in every country — they are the most conservative people, naturally. So long as it is a trade, it must be; it is to their interest to be conservative. So this tide of murmur outside the Aryan pale, the priests were trying to check with all their might. Within the Aryan pale, there was also a tremendous religious ferment, and [it was] mostly led by this military caste.
There was already the sect of Jains [who are a] conservative [force] in India [even] today. It is a very ancient sect. They declared against the validity of the scriptures of the Hindus, the Vedas. They wrote some books themselves, and they said: "Our books are the only original books, the only original Vedas, and the Vedas that now are going on under that name have been written by the Brahmins to dupe the people." And they also laid the same plan. You see, it is difficult for you to meet the arguments of the Hindus about the scriptures. They also claimed [that] the world has been created through those books. And they were written in the popular language. The Sanskrit, even then, had ceased to be a spoken language — [it had] just the same relation [to the spoken language] as Latin has to modern Italian. Now, they wrote all their books in Pali; and when a Brahmin said, "Why, your books are in Pali! ", they said, "Sanskrit is a language of the dead."
In their methods and manners they were different. For, you see, these Hindu scriptures, the Vedas, are a vast mass of accumulation — some of them crude — until you come to where religion is taught, only the spiritual. Now, that was the portion of the Vedas which these sects all claimed to preach. Then, there are three steps in the ancient Vedas: first, work; second, worship; third, knowledge. When a man purifies himself by work and worship, then God is within that man. He has realised He is already there. He only can have seen Him because the mind has become pure. Now, the mind can become purified by work and worship. That is all. Salvation is already there. We don't know it. Therefore, work, worship, and knowledge are the three steps. By work, they mean doing good to others. That has, of course, something in it, but mostly, as to the Brahmins, work means to perform these elaborate ceremonials: killing of cows and killing of bulls, killing of goats and all sorts of animals, that are taken fresh and thrown into the fire, and so on. "Now" declared the Jains, "that is no work at all, because injuring others can never be any good work"; and they said; "This is the proof that your Vedas are false Vedas, manufactured by the priests, because you do not mean to say that any good book will order us [to be] killing animals and doing these things. You do not believe it. So all this killing of animals and other things that you see in the Vedas, they have been written by the Brahmins, because they alone are benefited. It is the priest only [who] pockets the money and goes home. So, therefore, it is all priest-craft."
It was one of their doctrines that there cannot be any God: "The priests have invented God, that the people may believe in God and pay them money. All nonsense! there is no God. There is nature and there are souls, and that is all. Souls have got entangled into this life and got round them the clothing of man you call a body. Now, do good work." But from that naturally came the doctrine that everything that is matter is vile. They are the first teachers of asceticism. If the body is the result of impurity, why, therefore the body is vile. If a man stands on one leg for some time — "All right, it is a punishment". If the head comes up bump against a wall — "Rejoice, it is a very good punishment". Some of the great founders of the [Franciscan Order] — one of them St. Francis — were going to a certain place to meet somebody; and St. Francis had one of his companions with him, and he began to talk as to whether [the person] would receive them or not, and this man suggested that possibly he would reject them. Said St. Francis: "That is not enough, brother, but if, when we go and knock at the door, the man comes and drives us away, that is not enough. But if he orders us to be bound and gives us a thorough whipping, even that is not enough. And then, if he binds us hand and foot and whips us until we bleed at every pore and throws us outside in the snow, that would be enough."
These [same] ascetic ideas prevailed at that time. These Jains were the first great ascetics; but they did some great work. "Don't injure any and do good to all that you can, and that is all the morality and ethics, and that is all the work there is, and the rest is all nonsense — the Brahmins created that. Throw it all away." And then they went to work and elaborated this one principle all through, and it is a most wonderful ideal: how all that we call ethics they simply bring out from that one great principle of non-injury and doing good.
This sect was at least five hundred years before Buddha, and he was five hundred and fifty years before Christ . Now the whole of the animal creation they divide into five sections: the lowest have only one organ, that of touch; the next one, touch and taste; the next, touch, taste, and hearing; the next, touch, taste, hearing, and sight. And the next, the five organs. The first two, the one-organ and the two-organ, are invisible to the naked eye, and they art everywhere in water. A terrible thing, killing these [low forms of life]. This bacteriology has come into existence in the modern world only in the last twenty years and therefore nobody knew anything about it. They said, the lowest animals are only one-organ, touch; nothing else. The next greater [were] also invisible. And they all knew that if you boiled water these animals were all killed. So these monks, if they died of thirst, they would never kill these animals by drinking water. But if [a monk] stands at your door and you give him a little boiled water, the sin is on you of killing the animals — and he will get the benefit. They carry these ideas to ludicrous extremes. For instance, in rubbing the body — if he bathes — he will have to kill numbers of animalcules; so he never bathes. He gets killed himself; he says that is all right. Life has no care for him; he will get killed and save life.
These Jains were there. There were various other sects of ascetics; and while this was going on, on the one hand, there was the political jealousy between the priests and the kings. And then these different dissatisfied sects [were] springing up everywhere. And there was the greater problem: the vast multitudes of people wanting the same rights as the Aryans, dying of thirst while the perennial stream of nature went flowing by them, and no right to drink a drop of water.
And that man was born — the great man Buddha. Most of you know about him, his life. And in spite of all the miracles and stories that generally get fastened upon any great man, in the first place, he is one of the most historical prophets of the world. Two are very historical: one, the most ancient, Buddha, and the other, Mohammed, because both friends and foes are agreed about them. So we are perfectly sure that there were such persons. As for the other persons, we have only to take for granted what the disciples say — nothing more. Our Krishna — you know, the Hindu prophet — he is very mythological. A good deal of his life, and everything about him, is written only by his disciples; and then there seem to be, sometimes, three or four men, who all loom into one. We do not know so clearly about many of the prophets; but as to this man, because both friends and foes write of him, we are sure that there was such a historical personage. And if we analyse through all the fables and reports of miracles and stories that generally are heaped upon a great man in this world, we will find an inside core; and all through the account of that man, he never did a thing for himself — never! How do you know that? Because, you see, when fables are fastened upon a man, the fables must be tinged with that man's general character. Not one fable tried to impute any vice or any immorality to the man. Even his enemies have favourable accounts.
When Buddha was born, he was so pure that whosoever looked at his face from a distance immediately gave up the ceremonial religion and became a monk and became saved. So the gods held a meeting. They said, "We are undone". Because most of the gods live upon the ceremonials. These sacrifices go to the gods and these sacrifices were all gone. The gods were dying of hunger and [the reason for] it was that their power was gone. So the gods said: "We must, anyhow, put this man down. He is too pure for our life." And then the gods came and said: "Sir, we come to ask you something. We want to make a great sacrifice and we mean to make a huge fire, and we have been seeking all over the world for a pure spot to light the fire on and could not find it, and now we have found it. If you will lie down, on your breast we will make the huge fire." "Granted," he says, "go on." And the gods built the fire high upon the breast of Buddha, and they thought he was dead, and he was not. And then they went about and said, "We are undone." And all the gods began to strike him. No good. They could not kill him. From underneath, the voice comes: "Why [are you] making all these vain attempts?" "Whoever looks upon you becomes purified and is saved, and nobody is going to worship us." "Then, your attempt is vain, because purity can never be killed." This fable was written by his enemies, and yet throughout the fable the only blame that attaches to Buddha is that he was so great a teacher of purity.
About his doctrines, some of you know a little. It is his doctrines that appeal to many modern thinkers whom you call agnostics He was a great preacher of the brotherhood of mankind: "Aryan or non-Aryan, caste or no caste, and sects or no sects, every one has the same right to God and to religion and to freedom. Come in all of you." But as to other things, he was very agnostic. "Be practical." There came to him one day five young men, Brahmin born, quarrelling upon a question. They came to him to ask him the way to truth. And one said: "My people teach this, and this is the way to truth." The other said: "I have been taught this, and this is the only way to truth." "Which is the right way, sir?" "Well, you say your people taught this is truth and is the way to God?" "Yes." "But did you see God?" "No, sir." "Your father?" "No, sir." "Your grandfather?" "No, sir." "None of them saw God?" "No" "Well, and your teachers — neither [any] of them saw God?" "No." And he asked the same to the others. They all declared that none had seen God. "Well," said Buddha, "in a certain village came a young man weeping and howling and crying: 'Oh, I love her so! oh my, I love her so!' And then the villagers came; and the only thing he said was he loved her so. 'Who is she that you love?' 'I do not know.' 'Where does she live?' 'I do not know' — but he loved her so. 'How does she look?' 'That I do not know; but oh, I love her so.'" Then asked Buddha: "Young man, what would you call this young man?" "Why, sir, he was a fool!" And they all declared: "Why, sir, that young man was certainly a fool, to be crying and all that about a woman, to say he loved her so much and he never saw her or knew that she existed or anything?" "Are you not the same? You say that this God your father or your grandfather never saw, and now you are quarrelling upon a thing which neither you nor your ancestors ever knew, and you are trying to cut each other's throats about it." Then the young men asked: "What are we to do?" "Now, tell me: did your father ever teach that God is ever angry?" "No, sir." "Did your father ever teach that God is evil?" "No, sir, He is always pure." "Well, now, if you are pure and good and all that, do you not think that you will have more chance to come near to that God than by discussing all this and trying to cut each other's throats? Therefore, say I: be pure and be good; be pure and love everyone." And that was [all].
You see that non-killing of animals and charity towards animals was an already existing doctrine when he was born; but it was new with him — the breaking down of caste, that tremendous movement. And the other thing that was new: he took forty of his disciples and sent them all over the world, saying, "Go ye; mix with all races and nations and preach the excellent gospel for the good of all, for the benefit of all." And, of course, he was not molested by the Hindus. He died at a ripe old age. All his life he was a most stern man: he never yielded to weakness. I do not believe many of his doctrines; of course, I do not. I believe that the Vedantism of the old Hindus is much more thoughtful, is a grander philosophy of life. I like his method of work, but what I like [most] in that man is that, among all the prophets of mankind, here was a man who never had any cobwebs in his brain, and [who was] sane and strong. When kingdoms were at his feet, he was still the same man, maintaining "I am a man amongst men."
Why, the Hindus, they are dying to worship somebody. You will find, if you live long enough, I will be worshipped by our people. If you go there to teach them something, before you die you will be worshipped. Always trying to worship somebody. And living in that race, the world-honoured Buddha, he died always declaring that he was but man. None of his adulators could draw from him one remark that he was anything different from any other man.
Those last dying words of his always thrilled through my heart. He was old, he was suffering, he was near his death, and then came the despised outcaste — he lives on carrion, dead animals; the Hindus would not allow them to come into cities — one of these invited him to a dinner and he came with his disciples, and the poor Chanda, he wanted to treat this great teacher according to what he thought would be best; so he had a lot of pig's flesh and a lot of rice for him, and Buddha looked at that. The disciples were all [hesitating], and the Master said: "Well, do not eat, you will be hurt." But he quietly sat down and ate. The teacher of equality must eat the [outcaste] Chanda's dinner, even the pig's flesh. He sat down and ate it.
He was already dying. He found death coming on, and he asked, "Spread for me something under this tree, for I think the end is near." And he was there under the tree, and he laid himself down; he could not sit up any more. And the first thing he did, he said: "Go to that Chanda and tell him that he has been one of my greatest benefactors; for his meal, I am going to Nirvâna." And then several men came to be instructed, and a disciple said, "Do not go near now, the Master is passing away". And as soon as he heard it, the Lord said, "Let them come in". And somebody else came and the disciples would not [let them enter]. Again they came, and then the dying Lord said: "And O, thou Ananda, I am passing away. Weep not for me. Think not for me. I am gone. Work out diligently your own salvation. Each one of you is just what I am. I am nothing but one of you. What I am today is what I made myself. Do you struggle and make yourselves what I am. . . ."
These are the memorable words of Buddha: "Believe not because an old book is produced as an authority. Believe not because your father said [you should] believe the same. Believe not because other people like you believe it. Test everything, try everything, and then believe it, and if you find it for the good of many, give it to all." And with these words, the Master passed away.
See the sanity of the man. No gods, no angels, no demons — nobody. Nothing of the kind. Stern, sane, every brain-cell perfect and complete, even at the moment of death. No delusion. I do not agree with many of his doctrines. You may not. But in my opinion — oh, if I had only one drop of that strength! The sanest philosopher the world ever saw. Its best and its sanest teacher. And never that man bent before even the power of the tyrannical Brahmins. Never that man bent. Direct and everywhere the same: weeping with the miserable, helping the miserable, singing with the singing, strong with the strong, and everywhere the same sane and able man.
And, of course, with all this I can [not] understand his doctrine. You know he denied that there was any soul in man — that is, in the Hindu sense of the word. Now, we Hindus all believe that there is something permanent in man, which is unchangeable and which is living through all eternity. And that in man we call Atman, which is without beginning and without end. And [we believe] that there is something permanent in nature [and that we call Brahman, which is also without beginning and without end]. He denied both of these. He said there is no proof of anything permanent. It is all a mere mass of change; a mass of thought in a continuous change is what you call a mind. ... The torch is leading the procession. The circle is a delusion. [Or take the example of a river.] It is a continuous river passing on; every moment a fresh mass of water passing on. So is this life; so is all body, so is all mind.
Well, I do not understand his doctrine — we Hindus never understood it. But I can understand the motive behind that. Oh, the gigantic motive! The Master says that selfishness is the great curse of the world; that we are selfish and that therein is the curse. There should be no motive for selfishness. You are [like a river] passing [on] — a continuous phenomenon. Have no God; have no soul; stand on your feet and do good for good's sake — neither for fear of punishment nor for [the sake of] going anywhere. Stand sane and motiveless. The motive is: I want to do good, it is good to do good. Tremendous! Tremendous! I do not sympathise with his metaphysics at all; but my mind is jealous when I think of the moral force. Just ask your minds which one of you can stand for one hour, able and daring like that man. I cannot for five minutes. I would become a coward and want a support. I am weak — a coward. And I warm to think of this tremendous giant. We cannot approach that strength. The world never saw [anything] compared to that strength. And I have not yet seen any other strength like that. We are all born cowards. If we can save ourselves [we care about nothing else]. Inside is the tremendous fear, the tremendous motive, all the time. Our own selfishness makes us the most arrant cowards; our own selfishness is the great cause of fear and cowardice. And there he stood: "Do good because it is good; ask no more questions; that is enough. A man made to do good by a fable, a story, a superstition — he will be doing evil as soon as the opportunity comes. That man alone is good who does good for good's sake, and that is the character of the man."
"And what remains of man?" was asked of the Master. "Everything — everything. But what is in the man? Not the body not the soul, but character. And that is left for all ages. All that have passed and died, they have left for us their characters, eternal possessions for the rest of humanity; and these characters are working — working all through." What of Buddha? What of Jesus of Nazareth? The world is full of their characters. Tremendous doctrine!
Let us come down a little — we have not come to the subject at all. (Laughter.) I must add not a few words more this evening. ...
And then, what he did. His method of work: organisation. The idea that you have today of church is his character. He left the church. He organised these monks and made them into a body. Even the voting by ballot is there five hundred and sixty years before Christ. Minute organization. The church was left and became a tremendous power, and did great missionary work in India and outside India. Then came, three hundred years after, two hundred years before Christ, the great emperor Asoka, as he has been called by your Western historians, the divinest of monarchs, and that man became entirely converted to the ideas of Buddha, and he was the greatest emperor of the world at that time. His grandfather was a contemporary of Alexander, and since Alexander's time, India had become more intimately connected with Greece. ... Every day in Central Asia some inscription or other is being found. India had forgotten all about Buddha and Asoka and everyone. But there were pillars, obelisks, columns, with ancient letters which nobody could read. Some of the old Mogul emperors declared they would give millions for anybody to read those; but nobody could. Within the last thirty years those have been read; they are all written in Pali.
The first inscription is: ". . ."
And then he writes this inscription, describing the terror and the misery of war; and then he became converted to religion. Then said he: "Henceforth let none of my descendants think of acquiring glory by conquering other races. If they want glory, let them help other races; let them send teachers of sciences and teachers of religion. A glory won by the sword is no glory at all." And next you find how he is sending missionaries even to Alexandria.... You wonder that you find all over that part of the country sects rising immediately, called Theraputae, Essenes, and all those — extreme vegetarians, and so on. Now this great Emperor Asoka built hospitals for men and for animals. The inscriptions show they are ordering hospitals, building hospitals for men and for animals. That is to say, when an animal gets old, if I am poor and cannot keep it any longer, I do not shoot it down for mercy. These hospitals are maintained by public charity. The coasting traders pay so much upon every hundredweight they sell, and all that goes to the hospital; so nobody is touched. If you have a cow that is old — anything — and do not want to keep it, send it to the hospital; they keep it, even down to rats and mice and anything you send. Only, our ladies try to kill these animals sometimes, you know. They go in large numbers to see them and they bring all sorts of cakes; the animals are killed many times by this food. He claimed that the animals should be as much under the protection of the government as man. Why should animals be allowed to be killed? [There] is no reason. But he says, before prohibiting the killing of animals for food even, [people] must be provided with all sorts of vegetables. So he sent and collected all kinds of vegetables and planted them in India; and then, as soon as these were introduced, the order was: henceforth, whosoever kills an animal will be punished. A government is to be a government; the animals must be protected also. What business has a man to kill a cow, a goat, or any other animal for food?
Thus Buddhism was and did become a great political power in India. Gradually it also fell to pieces — after all, this tremendous missionary enterprise. But to their credit it must be said, they never took up the sword to preach religion. Excepting the Buddhistic religion, there is not one religion in the world which could make one step without bloodshed — not one which could get a hundred thousand converts just by brain power alone. No, no. All through. And this is just what you are going to do in the Philippines. That is your method. Make them religious by the sword. That is what your priests are preaching. Conquer and kill them that they may get religion. A wonderful way of preaching religion!
You know how this great emperor Asoka was converted. This great emperor in his youth was not so good. [He had a brother.] And the two brothers quarrelled and the other brother defeated this one, and the emperor in vengeance wanted to kill him. The emperor got the news that he had taken shelter with a Buddhistic monk. Now, I have told you how our monks are very holy; no one would come near them. The emperor himself came. He said, "Deliver the man to me" Then the monk preached to him: "Vengeance is bad. Disarm anger with love. Anger is not cured by anger, nor hatred by hatred. Dissolve anger by love. Cure hatred by love. Friend, if for one evil thou returnest another, thou curest not the first evil, but only add one evil more to the world." The emperor said: "That is all right, fool that you are. Are you ready to give your life — to give your life for that man?" "Ready, sir." And he came out. And the emperor drew his sword, and he said: "Get ready." And just [as he] was going to strike, he looked at the face of the man. There was not a wink in those eyes. The emperor stopped, and he said: "Tell me, monk, where did you learn this strength, poor beggar, not to wink?" And then he preached again. "Go on, monk", he said, "That is nice", he said. Accordingly, he [fell under] the charm of the Master — Buddha's charm.
There have been three things in Buddhism: the Buddha himself, his law, his church. At first it was so simple. When the Master died, before his death, they said: "What shall we do with you?" "Nothing." "What monuments shall we make over you?" He said: "Just make a little heap if you want, or just do not do anything." By and by, there arose huge temples and all the paraphernalia. The use of images was unknown before then. I say they were the first to use images. There are images of Buddha and all the saints, sitting about and praying. All this paraphernalia went on multiplying with this organisation. Then these monasteries became rich. The real cause of the downfall is here. Monasticism is all very good for a few; but when you preach it in such a fashion that every man or woman who has a mind immediately gives up social life, when you find over the whole of India monasteries, some containing a hundred thousand monks, sometimes twenty thousand monks in one building — huge, gigantic buildings, these monasteries, scattered all over India and, of course, centres of learning, and all that — who were left to procreate progeny, to continue the race? Only the weaklings. All the strong and vigorous minds went out. And then came national decay by the sheer loss of vigour.
I will tell you of this marvellous brotherhood. It is great. But theory and idea is one thing and actual working is another thing. The idea is very great: practicing nonresistance and all that, but if all of us go out in the street and practice non-resistance, there would be very little left in this city. That is to say, the idea is all right, but nobody has yet found a practical solution [as to] how to attain it.
There is something in caste, so far as it means blood; such a thing as heredity there is, certainly. Now try to [understand] — why do you not mix your blood with the Negroes, the American Indians? Nature will not allow you. Nature does not allow you to mix your blood with them. There is the unconscious working that saves the race. That was the Aryan's caste. Mind you, I do not say that they are not equal to us. They must have the same privileges and advantages, and everything; but we know that if certain races mix up, they become degraded. With all the strict caste of the Aryan and non-Aryan, that wall was thrown down to a certain extent, and hordes of these outlandish races came in with all their queer superstitions and manners and customs. Think of this: not decency enough to wear clothes, eating carrion, etc. But behind him came his fetish, his human sacrifice, his superstition, his diabolism. He kept it behind, [he remained] decent for a few years. After that he brought all [these] things out in front. And that was degrading to the whole race. And then the blood mixed; [intermarriages] took place with all sorts of unmixable races. The race fell down. But, in the long run it proved good. If you mix up with Negroes and American Indians, surely this civilisation will fall down. But hundreds and hundreds years after, out of this mixture will come a gigantic race once more, stronger than ever; but, for the time being, you have to suffer. The Hindus believe — that is a peculiar belief, I think; and I do not know, I have nothing to say to the contrary, I have not found anything to the contrary — they believe there was only one civilised race: the Aryan. Until he gives his blood, no other race can be civilised. No teaching will do. The Aryan gives his blood to a race, and then it becomes civilised. Teaching alone will not do. He would be an example in your country: would you give your blood to the Negro race? Then he would get higher culture.
The Hindu loves caste. I may have little taint of that superstition — I do not know. I love the Master's ideal. Great! But, for me, I do not think that the working was very practical; and that was one of the great causes that led to the downfall of the Indian nation, in the long run. But then it brought about this tremendous fusion. Where so many different races are all fusing, mingling — one man white like you, or yellow, while another man as black as I am, and all grades between these two extremes, and each race keeping their customs, manners, and everything — in the long run a fusion is taking place, and out of this fusion surely will come a tremendous upheaval; but, for the time being, the giant must sleep. That is the effect of all such fusion.
When Buddhism went down that way, there came they inevitable reaction. There is but one entity in the wholes world. It is a unit world. The diversity is only eye-service. It is all one. The idea of unity and what we call monism — without duality — is the idea in India. This doctrine has: been always in India; [it was] brought forward whenever materialism and scepticism broke down everything. When Buddhism broke down everything by introducing all sorts of foreign barbarians into India — their manners and customs and things — there was a reaction, and that reaction was led by a young monk [Shankarâchârya]. And [instead] of preaching new doctrines and always thinking new thoughts and making sects, he brought back the Vedas to life: and modern Hinduism has thus an admixture of ancient Hinduism, over which the Vedantists predominate. But, you see, what once dies never comes back to life, and those ceremonials of [Hinduism] never came back to life. You will be astonished if I tell you that, according to the old ceremonials, he is not a good Hindu who does not eat beef. On certain occasions he must sacrifice a bull and eat it. That is disgusting now. However they may differ from each other in India, in that they are all one — they never eat beef. The ancient sacrifices and the ancient gods, they are all gone; modern India belongs to the spiritual part of the Vedas.
Buddhism was the first sect in India. They were the first to say: "Ours is the only path. Until you join our church, you cannot be saved." That was what they said: "It is the correct path." But, being of Hindu blood, they could not be such stony-hearted sectarians as in other countries. There will be salvation for you: nobody will go wrong for ever. No, no. [There was] too much of Hindu blood in them for that. The heart was not so stony as that. But you have to join them.
But the Hindu idea, you know, is not to join anybody. Wherever you are, that is a point from which you can start to the centre. All right. It — Hinduism — has this advantage: its secret is that doctrines and dogmas do not mean anything; what you are is what matters. If you talk all the best philosophies the world ever produced, [but] if you are a fool in your behaviour, they do not count; and if in your behaviour you are good, you have more chances. This being so, the Vedantist can wait for everybody. Vedantism teaches that there is but one existence and one thing real, and that is God. It is beyond all time and space and causation and everything. We can never define Him. We can never say what He is except [that] He is Absolute Existence, Absolute Knowledge, Absolute Blissfulness. He is the only reality. Of everything He is the reality; of you and me, of the wall and of [everything] everywhere. It is His knowledge upon which all our knowledge depends: it is His blissfulness upon which depends our pleasure; and He is the only reality. And when man realises this, he knows that "I am the only reality, because I am He — what is real in me is He also". So that when a man is perfectly pure and good and beyond all grossness, he finds, as Jesus found: "I and my Father are one." The Vedantist has patience to wait for everybody. Wherever you are, this is the highest: "I and my Father are one." Realise it. If an image helps, images are welcome. If worshipping a great man helps you, worship him. If worshipping Mohammed helps you, go on. Only be sincere; and if you are sincere, says Vedantism, you are sure to be brought to the goal. None will be left. your heart, which contains all truth, will unfold itself chapter after chapter, till you know the last truth, that "I and my Father are one". And what is salvation? To live with God. Where? Anywhere. Here this moment. One moment in infinite time is quite as good as any other moment. This is the old doctrine of the Vedas, you see. This was revived. Buddhism died out of India. It left its mark on their charity, its animals, etc. in India; and Vedantism is reconquering India from one end to the other.
Notes
文本来自Wikisource公共领域。原版由阿德瓦伊塔修道院出版。