代替品的崇拜与偶像崇拜
本译文由人工智能辅助工具生成，可能存在不准确之处。如需查阅权威文本，请参考英文原文。
AI-translated. May contain errors. For accurate text, refer to the original English.
中文
第八章
代替物与神像的礼拜
接下来要探讨的，是对"象征物"（Pratikas）的礼拜——即礼拜或多或少可作为上帝替代品的事物——以及对神像（Pratimās）的礼拜。通过象征物礼拜上帝是什么意思？
薄伽万·罗摩奴阇（Bhagavān Rāmānuja）说："以虔信之心将心灵联结于非梵之物，却将其视为梵——"商羯罗（Shankara）说："以梵来礼拜心灵——这是内在的；以梵来礼拜空（Ākāsha）——这是对天神（Devas）而言的。"心灵是内在的象征物，空是外在的象征物，两者都须作为上帝的替代品来礼拜。他继续说："类似地——'太阳即是梵，此乃命令'，'礼拜名为梵者'——在所有此类段落中，都会产生关于象征物礼拜的疑问。""象征物"（Pratika）一词意为"朝向"；礼拜象征物，是将某物作为替代品来礼拜——这一替代品在某一方面或若干方面，越来越近似于梵，但终究不是梵。除了《天启》（Shrutis）中提及的象征物之外，在《往世书》（Purānas）与《密续》（Tantras）中还可找到各种其他的象征物。在这种象征物礼拜中，可以涵盖祖先礼拜与天神礼拜的各种形式。
现在，礼拜自在天（Ishvara），唯礼拜自在天，方为虔信（Bhakti）；礼拜任何其他存在——天神、祖先或任何他者——都不能算作虔信。礼拜各种天神的各种形式，皆属仪式性的业（ritualistic Karma）的范畴，这类礼拜只能给礼拜者带来特定的果报——以某种天界的享受为形式，既不能生起虔信，也不能引向解脱（Mukti）。因此，有一件事必须谨慎铭记。假若在某些情况下，那崇高的哲学理想——至上之梵——被象征物礼拜拉低到象征物的层次，而象征物本身被视为礼拜者的真我（Atman）或其内在主宰（Antaryāmin），礼拜者便会完全误入歧途，因为任何象征物都不可能真正是礼拜者的真我。
但若梵本身是礼拜的对象，而象征物仅作为梵的替代品或暗示——即通过象征物来礼拜遍在的梵，将象征物本身理想化为一切的根因之梵——那么这种礼拜是确实有益的；不仅如此，对于一切人类而言，只要他们尚未超越礼拜中心灵的初级或预备阶段，这种礼拜便是绝对必要的。因此，当任何天神或其他存在被礼拜，且只是为其自身而礼拜时，这种礼拜仅是仪式性的业；作为一种明法（Vidyā），它只能给我们带来该特定明法所属的果报；但当天神或任何其他存在被视为梵而礼拜时，所获得的结果与礼拜自在天所获得的相同。这就解释了为何在《天启》与《法典》（Smritis）中，有许多地方将某位天神、某位仙人或某个非凡的存在提升出其自身的本性，并将其理想化为梵，然后加以礼拜。不二论（Advaita）者说："当名与形被去除之后，一切难道不都是梵吗？""祂，上主，难道不是每个人最内在的真我吗？"毗湿婆不二论（Vishishtādvaitins）者如是说。
——"甚至礼拜阿底提（Adityas）等所获的果报，也是梵自身所赐，因为祂是一切的主宰。"商羯罗在其《梵经注》（Brahma-Sūtra-Bhāshya）中说：
"梵就这样成为礼拜的对象，因为祂作为梵，被投射于象征物之上，正如毗湿奴（Vishnu）等被投射于神像之上一样。"
同样的道理既适用于象征物的礼拜，也适用于神像（Pratimās）的礼拜；也就是说，若神像代表某位天神或圣者，这种礼拜并非虔信的结果，也不引向解脱；但若它代表那唯一的上帝，对它的礼拜便能同时带来虔信与解脱。在世界主要宗教中，我们看到吠檀多（Vedanta）、佛教以及某些基督教形式都自由地使用神像；只有两种宗教——伊斯兰教与新教——拒绝这种助道方式。然而，伊斯兰教徒几乎将其圣者与殉道者的墓地当作神像来使用；而新教徒，由于拒绝一切具体的宗教助道手段，正一年年地越来越远离灵性，以至于在当今，进步派新教徒与奥古斯特·孔德的追随者，或那些仅宣扬伦理的不可知论者之间，几乎没有什么区别了。再者，在基督教与伊斯兰教中，凡存在神像崇拜之处，都被归入这样一种类别：象征物或神像为其自身而被礼拜，而非作为"观见上帝的助道方便"（Drishtisaukaryam）；因此，这种礼拜至多只具有仪式性业的性质，既不能产生虔信，也不能产生解脱。在这种形式的偶像礼拜中，灵魂的忠诚被给予了自在天以外的事物，故这种对神像、坟墓、庙宇或圣祠的使用，是真正的偶像崇拜；它本身既非罪恶，也非邪恶——它是一种仪式，一种业，礼拜者必然并将获得其相应的果报。
English
CHAPTER VIII
WORSHIP OF SUBSTITUTES AND IMAGES
The next points to be considered are the worship of Pratikas or of things more or less satisfactory as substitutes for God, and the worship of Pratimâs or images. What is the worship of God through a Pratika?
— Joining the mind with devotion to that which is not Brahman, taking it to be Brahman" — says Bhagavân Râmânuja. "Worship the mind as Brahman this is internal; and the Âkâsha as Brahman, this is with regard to the Devas", says Shankara. The mind is an internal Pratika, the Akasha is an external one, and both have to be worshipped as substitutes of God. He continues, "Similarly — 'the Sun is Brahman, this is the command', 'He who worships Name as Brahman' — in all such passages the doubt arises as to the worship of Pratikas." The word Pratika means going towards; and worshipping a Pratika is worshipping something as a substitute which is, in some one or more respects, like Brahman more and more, but is not Brahman. Along with the Pratikas mentioned in the Shrutis there are various others to be found in the Purânas and the Tantras. In this kind of Pratika-worship may be included all the various forms of Pitri-worship and Deva-worship.
Now worshipping Ishvara and Him alone is Bhakti; the worship of anything else — Deva, or Pitri, or any other being — cannot be Bhakti. The various kinds of worship of the various Devas are all to be included in ritualistic Karma, which gives to the worshipper only a particular result in the form of some celestial enjoyment, but can neither give rise to Bhakti nor lead to Mukti. One thing, therefore, has to be carefully borne in mind. If, as it may happen in some cases, the highly philosophic ideal, the supreme Brahman, is dragged down by Pratika-worship to the level of the Pratika, and the Pratika itself is taken to be the Atman of the worshipper or his Antaryâmin (Inner Ruler), the worshipper gets entirely misled, as no Pratika can really be the Atman of the worshipper.
But where Brahman Himself is the object of worship, and the Pratika stands only as a substitute or a suggestion thereof, that is to say, where, through the Pratika the omnipresent Brahman is worshipped — the Pratika itself being idealised into the cause of all, Brahman — the worship is positively beneficial; nay, it is absolutely necessary for all mankind until they have all got beyond the primary or preparatory state of the mind in regard to worship. When, therefore, any gods or other beings are worshipped in and for themselves, such worship is only a ritualistic Karma; and as a Vidyâ (science) it gives us only the fruit belonging to that particular Vidya; but when the Devas or any other beings are looked upon as Brahman and worshipped, the result obtained is the same as by the worshipping of Ishvara. This explains how, in many cases, both in the Shrutis and the Smritis, a god, or a sage, or some other extraordinary being is taken up and lifted, as it were, out of his own nature and idealised into Brahman, and is then worshipped. Says the Advaitin, "Is not everything Brahman when the name and the form have been removed from it?" "Is not He, the Lord, the innermost Self of every one?" says the Vishishtâdvaitin.
— "The fruition of even the worship of Adityas etc. Brahman Himself bestows, because He is the Ruler of all." Says Shankara in his Brahma-Sutra-Bhâsya—
"Here in this way does Brahman become the object of worship, because He, as Brahman, is superimposed on the Pratikas, just as Vishnu etc. are superimposed upon images etc."
The same ideas apply to the worship of the Pratimas as to that of the Pratikas; that is to say, if the image stands for a god or a saint, the worship is not the result of Bhakti, and does not lead lo liberation; but if it stands for the one God, the worship thereof will bring both Bhakti and Mukti. Of the principal religions of the world we see Vedantism, Buddhism, and certain forms of Christianity freely using images; only two religions, Mohammedanism and Protestantism, refuse such help. Yet the Mohammedans use the grave of their saints and martyrs almost in the place of images; and the Protestants, in rejecting all concrete helps to religion, are drifting away every year farther and farther from spirituality till at present there is scarcely any difference between the advanced Protestants and the followers of August Comte, or agnostics who preach ethics alone. Again, in Christianity and Mohammedanism whatever exists of image worship is made to fall under that category in which the Pratika or the Pratima is worshipped in itself, but not as a "help to the vision" (Drishtisaukaryam) of God; therefore it is at best only of the nature of ritualistic Karmas and cannot produce either Bhakti or Mukti. In this form of image-worship, the allegiance of the soul is given to other things than Ishvara, and, therefore, such use of images, or graves, or temples, or tombs, is real idolatry; it is in itself neither sinful nor wicked — it is a rite — a Karma, and worshippers must and will get the fruit thereof.
文本来自Wikisource公共领域。原版由阿德瓦伊塔修道院出版。