第二部分:欧洲报纸报道
本译文由人工智能辅助工具生成,可能存在不准确之处。如需查阅权威文本,请参考英文原文。
AI-translated. May contain errors. For accurate text, refer to the original English.
中文
第二部分:欧洲报刊报道
〔《梅登黑德顾问报》,一八九五年十月二十三日〕
周四,辨喜(Vivekananda)在梅登黑德市政厅发表演讲,讲题为「爱的东方教义」。由于当日城中另有其他活动,听众并不众多。公众中也有人将此位演讲者与通神学会相联系,然据我们所知,他与该学会毫无关联,与任何其他社团亦然;他也无意自行创立任何社团。他相信,应向所有愿意聆听的人阐明自己的见解,听者可以原样接受,或加以适当修正,或完全予以拒绝——他相信,在众说纷纭的争论之中,真理终将获胜。
晚八时,由E·加德纳先生(J.P.,C.C.)主持,简短地为身着本国服装的演讲者作了介绍。随后,辨喜就关于对神之虔信(Bhakti),即东方通称之「爱」,阐述了其见解,大要如下:宗教可分为两种形式,其一几乎全然迷信,其二则纯属玄学,然而若任何一种要具有感召力,则必须伴以爱。单纯的事业行动若缺少此一要素便不能令人满足。大地上可以建满医院,修通良路,可以有组织严密的社会机构与良好的卫生设施,然而这一切皆属外在的物质过程,其本身并不能使人更接近神性。现实主义者与理想主义者二者皆不可或缺,互为补充。
我们为自己所塑造的神的形象,则是如此:野蛮的民族有一位暴虐残忍的神;睿智而高尚的民族在日益宽广的潜能中看见神。神永远是神,然而人与民族对他所持的见解各有不同。没有比爱更高的见解。那心中对每一生灵怀有不懈之爱的人,无论他认识到该生灵是神的显现、神实际临在其中,还是他仅仅视其为神所塑造之物——此人皆行走在趋向神性之道上,行走在伟大的虔信与舍离之道上。对于神所创造的生灵,无论其在他较为狭隘的见解中显得多么令人厌恶,他都不会伤害;他出于爱而给予,而非出于骄傲;在爱神之中,他爱神的显现,与之共事,依之而居。
演讲辞情深意远,讲毕,由E·T·斯特迪先生(来自卡弗沙姆)提议,向主席致谢。
整个程序仅历时略逾半小时。
〔《标准报》,一八九五年十月二十三日〕
《标准报》称,自罗摩罕·罗易(Ram Mohan Roy)时代以来,除柯沙布·乔德哈利(Keshab Chandra Sen)之外,昨晚在王子厅发表演讲的这位婆罗门,是出现在英国讲坛上最令人瞩目的印度人。……
此次演讲,是对吠檀多(Vedanta)学派泛神论哲学最无所畏惧、最雄辩有力的阐发,且辨喜似乎也将瑜伽(Yoga)学派的道德因素大量融入其体系——演讲的末尾部分,以修正后的形式呈现的,并非苦行主义的倡导(苦行主义为瑜伽学派之主要特征),而是对所谓一切物质享乐与恩赐的舍离,作为进入与至高无上、绝对之真我(Atman)完全合一的唯一途径。演讲开篇回顾了本世纪初粗陋的唯物主义的兴起,以及其后各种玄学思想形式的发展——这些思想一度将唯物主义一扫而空。由此,他进而探讨知识的起源与本质。在某些方面,他对这一问题的见解几乎等同于纯粹的费希特主义,然而其表述所用的语言、所举的例证,以及所作的承认,却是任何德国超验论者都不会采用的。他承认存在一个粗陋的外在物质世界,但坦言自己不知何为物质。他断言,心灵是一种更为精微的物质,而在其背后,是人的灵魂——不动不移、亘古不变,外在的事物在其面前如同列队行进,无始无终,换言之,是永恒的,最终也是神。他以高度的综合性与丰富的例证展开这一泛神论的概念——人与神的位格同一,诸多段落皆充满美感、庄严与诚挚。他说:「宇宙中只有一个灵魂。」
没有「你」,没有「我」;所有的差别皆融入绝对的统一,那唯一的无限存在——神。
由此,自然引出灵魂不朽的论断,以及某种类似灵魂轮回(Samsara)、趋向更高完美显现的论述。如前所述,其长达二十分钟的结语,是对舍离教义的陈述。其间,他对工厂、机器以及其他发明,以及书籍为人类所做之贡献,作出了毫不留情的批评性判断,与佛陀或耶稣所说的寥寥数语相比之下,那一切皆黯然失色。此次演讲显然是完全即兴的,以悦耳的声音发表,绝无任何迟疑停顿。
〔《伦敦早报》,一八九五年十月二十三日〕
——昨晚,在皮卡迪利的王子厅,辨喜——一位目前在英访问的印度瑜伽(Yogi)士,发表了一篇被称为「演说辞」的讲辞,主题为「自我认识」。如所说明,所谓瑜伽士,乃是正式舍弃世俗、潜心于研学与虔修的人。辨喜离开祖国,最初是为了在两年前于芝加哥举行的宗教议会上阐释吠檀多(Vedanta)哲学,此后他一直在美国发表关于同一主题的演讲。昨晚演讲中,他宣称,十九世纪行将终结之际,已出现了若干迹象,表明科学思想的钟摆正在摆回,因为世界各地的人们正在翻阅古籍,而古老的宗教形式正在重新浮现。在许多人看来,这似乎是一种退化,另一些人则将其视为那种周期性席卷社会的迷信狂潮之一,然而对于科学的研究者而言,当前的状况预示着宏大的未来益处。演讲者随后用了相当长的篇幅描述他所传授的独特哲学体系,并追溯了由此体系所滋生的宗教三个不同发展阶段。他讲述流畅,观众虽然数量不多,却聆听专注。
〔《基督教共和国》,一八九五年十一月十四日〕
南普莱斯礼拜堂演讲
「辨喜」上周日上午在南普莱斯礼拜堂就「吠檀多道德的基础」启迪会众。……
辨喜解释道,在他所阐发的道德体系中,行动并非出于对今生或来世奖赏的希冀,也非出于对此世或彼世惩罚的恐惧:「我们必须仅仅从内在的冲动出发去行动,为行动而行动,为责任而尽责任。」这种道德观被宣称优于耶稣的宗教,因而诱使一些所谓的基督徒转向佛教或其他东方哲学。然而,真正的基督教之精髓在于:若你的行动出于你内心的天国,天堂便是其结果;而若你依顺你外在的魔王之国而行事,则必落入沉沦。真正的基督徒并非如辨喜所暗示的那样,出于逃避惩罚的目的而行动,但同时他看见一切行动的终极后果。……
〔《女王与淑女报》,一八九五年十一月二十三日〕
霍维斯夫人(Mrs. Haweis)的首场秋日家庭聚会上周六在皇后宫举行,印度瑜伽(Yogi)士、苦行者辨喜(一八九三年芝加哥宗教议会佛教〔原文有误〕代表)以自由的精神,并不乏幽默地讨论了普世宗教的可能性与魅力。他表明,世界各大宗教的根本原则彼此相似,并在伟大的先知之中,将基督教的救主置于崇高的地位,然而隐然指出,他的教导有时并不见于其声称的信徒。各教派之间并无根本上不可调和之处——那些如今出于最善意的动机而彼此撕咬的教派,若将慈悲与同情带入清真寺、寺庙与教堂,便可得到和解。贝兹尔·威尔伯福斯牧师(Canon Basil Wilberforce)与霍维斯牧师(Rev. H. R. Haweis)均就辨喜的演讲作出了有趣的回应。……出席嘉宾共一百五十人。
〔《每日纪事报》,一八九六年五月十四日〕
芝麻俱乐部——五月十二日星期二晚,芝麻俱乐部召开例会,主席阿什顿·琼森先生(Mr. Ashton Jonson)遗憾地宣布,诺曼夫人因健康欠佳,未能如期出席,主持原定主题「我们是否应当回归土地」的辩论。辨喜因而就教育主题发表演讲,他强调,一个人若未能保持身体的纯洁,便无法获得精神上的伟大。道德给予力量;不道德之人向来软弱,在智识上绝无进步可言,在精神上更是如此。不道德一旦开始侵入国家生活,其根基便开始腐烂。每个国家的生命血脉在于各所学校——男女学生在此接受教育——因此,年轻的学子必须保持纯洁,而这种纯洁必须加以传授。
〔《光明》杂志,一八九六年七月四日〕
当我们初次得悉辨喜将来伦敦阐释吠檀多(Vedanta)哲学时,曾满怀期望,认为他的教导不仅能坚固唯灵论者的信仰,或许还能为其增添信众。我们有此期望,是因为印度哲学的精髓恰在于:人是一个具有身体的灵魂,而非一个也许具有灵魂的身体——而许多西方心灵所能企及的,至多不过是后者。……
我们现代的唯灵主义运动,有幸以实际的证明展示了灵魂独立于肉体而存在,因此,似乎有理由期待吠檀多哲学的阐发者与唯灵论者之间的合作。然而,我们并不十分确定这一可喜的结果能够实现,因为辨喜近期的若干言论,只会使这两个群体之间产生分歧。吠檀多哲学为修习者树立了一个崇高的目标——无非是展开其内在之神,而一位具有辨喜这般力量与雄辩之力的演讲者,对这一理念的呈现,莫不令人深深折服。我们唯有敬佩赞叹,直至现代唯灵主义被提及,而提及的方式,给我们留下的印象是:辨喜无保留地谴责一切求取灵异现象的集会。他承认曾与职业灵媒坐会观察,并认为他们无一例外,皆行欺骗之术。「灵音」,据辨喜所言,从未相互碰撞!「当那阴沉的声音渐渐消逝,一个小孩的声音便随之升起」,由此暗示,那些声响无一例外皆出于腹语之术。「灵界讯息」,他说,毫无价值,因为其内容从未超出「我很好,一切安好」或「请给约翰一块蛋糕」这样的水准。
这一断言,显然只能在不了解《灵界教导》一书内容的情况下才能作出——我们认为,该书的教导完全可以与辨喜的崇高教诲相提并论。制造伪造的物质化现象以及用线操控人形的过程,也被详细描述。
翌晚,我们再度出席,一份就辨喜反面批评所提诸问题的书面讨论题被宣读给众人。此后约三十分钟,用于对前一晚言论的申明与解释,令我们深感满意的是:辨喜不仅承认了灵魂与凡人沟通之可能性,更表达了他的信念——高级灵魂有时会到访人间以助益人类。然而,根据我们的理解,吠檀多哲学并不主张寻求这种交流,理由在于其可能存在的「危险」。一般认为,尚未发展的灵魂最易与人沟通,因此辨喜发出了警告之言,而未予任何鼓励之语。……
〔《光明》杂志,一八九六年十月二十八日〕
不久前,我们在维多利亚街那些阴暗却颇为便利的楼房之一的六楼,聆听了辨喜的一次演讲——这是关于印度宗教与哲学的一系列长篇讲座之一。……
(此为一八九六年夏季,在圣乔治路所作的一次周五晚间课讲,现无逐字记录可供参考。)
他滔滔不绝讲了一个半小时,未用任何笔记。此次演讲,与其说是有条理的研究,不如说是随感而发的论述,然而全程引人入胜。
主题以吠陀(Vedas)为主,间有关于进化论、现代科学、唯心主义与实在论、精神至上性等方面的游走探讨。总体而言,我们感知到,这位演讲者是一位倡导精神超越与精神和谐之普世宗教的布道者。从吠陀中摘录的若干段落——顺便一提,翻译得优美动人,诵读得声情并茂——在揭示「幕后」生命的人性与真实性方面,令人心向往之。令人渴望听到更多。
我们对其所作的一项坦承印象深刻:吠陀之中存在诸多矛盾,而虔诚的印度教徒从未想过否认或调和这些矛盾。人人皆可自由取其所好。在不同阶段、于不同层面,一切皆为真实。因此,印度教徒从不开除教籍,从不施以迫害。吠陀中的矛盾,犹如生命中的矛盾——它们是真实的,然而皆为真理。这似乎难以成立,但其中确有真知灼见。至少,就开除教籍与迫害而言,我们唯愿基督徒亦能提出印度教徒所主张的这一点。
## 参考资料
English
[Maidenhead Adviser, October 23, 1895]
On Thursday the Swami Vivekananda delivered a lecture at the Town Hall, Maidenhead, taking as his subject "The Eastern Doctrine of Love." Owing to other attractions in the town the attendance was not large. Many of the public also associated the lecturer with the Theosophical Society, with which, however, he has, we are informed, nothing whatever to do, nor with any other society, neither does he propose forming any society himself. He believes in expounding his views to whoever will listen to them and leaving those individuals to advocate them as a whole, or with whatever modifications they may deem fitting, or to reject them altogether, believing that out of the strife of all opinions truth at length prevails.
The chair was taken at 8 p.m. by Mr. E. Gardner, J.P., C.C., and he very briefly introduced the lecturer, who was clad in his native costume. The Swami then proceeded to express his view upon devotion to deity, or, as more commonly expressed in the East--love (Bhakti), to the following effect:--Religion may be divided into two forms, the first almost entirely superstitious and the second merely metaphysical, but if either of these is to have any force it must be accompanied by love. Work alone without this element did not satisfy. The land might be covered with hospitals, penetrated by good roads; there might be great social institutions well conducted, and good sanitation, but these were all external physical processes and by themselves brought man no nearer to Divinity. Both the realist and the idealist were necessary and complementary one of the other. The
which we form for ourselves of deity. A barbarous people have a tyrannical and cruel god. A wise and noble people see God in ever and ever widening potencies. God is always God, but the views which men and nations may take of Him vary. No higher view is known than that of love. The man who bears in his heart an unrelaxing love to every creature, whether he recognise that that creature is a manifestation of God, in which he is actually present, or whether he look upon it merely as fashioned by Deity, that man is on the path to Deity, on the great path of devotion and renunciation. He cannot injure the creature of God, however repulsive to his narrower view of what should or should not be. He gives in love, not in pride; in loving Deity he loves its manifestations, works with them and abides by them.
The lecture was impressively delivered, and at the close a vote of thanks was accorded the Chairman (on the proposition of Mr. E. T. Sturdy, of Caversham).
The proceedings occupied only a little over half an hour.
[Standard, October 23, 1895]
Since the days of Ramahoun [Ram Mohan] Roy, says the Standard, with the single exception of Keshub Chunder [Keshab Chandra] Sen, there has not appeared on an English platform a more interesting Indian figure than the Brahman who lectured in Princes' [Prince's] Hall last night. . . .
The lecture was a most fearless and eloquent exposition of the pantheistic philosophy of the Vedanta school, and the Swami seems to have incorporated into his system a good deal also of the moral element of the Yoga school, as the closing passage of his lecture presented in a modified form not the advocacy of mortification, which is the leading feature of the latter school, but the renunciation of all so called material comforts and blessings, as the only means of entering into perfect union with the supreme and absolute Self. The opening passages of the lecture were a review of the rise of the grosser form of Materialism in the beginning of the present century, and the later development of the various forms of metaphysical thought, which for a time swept materialism away. From this he passed on to discuss the origin and nature of knowledge. In some respects his views on this point were almost a statement of pure Fichteism, but they were expressed in language, and they embodied illustrations, and made admissions which no German transcendentalist would have used. He admitted there was a gross material world outside, but he confessed he did not know what matter was. He asserted that mind was a finer matter, and that behind was the soul of man, which was immovable, fixed, before which outward objects passed, as it were, in a procession, which was without beginning or end--in other words, which was eternal, and finally which was God. He worked out this pantheistic conception of the personal identity of man and God with great comprehensiveness and an ample wealth of illustration, and in passage after passage of great beauty, solemnity, and earnestness. "There is only one Soul in the Universe", he said:
There is no "you" or "me"; all variety is merged into the absolute unity, the one infinite existence--God.
From this, of course, followed the immortality of the soul, and something like the transmigration of souls towards higher manifestations of perfection. As already stated, his peroration of twenty minutes was a statement of the doctrine of renunciation. In the course of it he made some remorselessly disparaging criticism on the work that factories, engines and other inventions, and books were doing for man, compared with half a dozen words spoken by Buddha or Jesus. The lecture was evidently quite extemporaneous, and was delivered in a pleasing voice, free from any kind of hesitation.
[London Morning Post, October 23, 1895]
--Last night at Princes' [Prince's] Hall, Piccadilly, Swami Vivekananda, an Indian Yogi, who is at present on a visit to this country, delivered what was described as an "oration" on the subject of "Self Knowledge." A Yogi, it was explained, is one who formally renounces the world and gives himself up to study and devotion. Swami Vivekananda originally left his native land for the purpose of giving his interpretation of the Vedanta philosophy at the Parliament of Religions which was held two years ago at Chicago, and since that time he has been engaged in delivering lectures on the same subject in America. In the course of his address last night he declared that there were indications in these closing days of the 19th century that the pendulum of scientific thought was swinging back, for men all over the world were rummaging in the pages of ancient records, and ancient religious forms were again coming to the fore. To many this seemed to be a case of degeneration, while others regarded it as one of those outbursts of superstition which periodically visited society, but to the scientific student there was in the present state of things a prognostication of grand future benefit. The lecturer then proceeded at considerable length to describe the peculiar system of philosophy which he teaches, and traced the three different stages of the religion which has grown out of it. He spoke with a good deal of fluency, and his remarks were listened to with attention by the somewhat small audience.
[Christian Commonwealth, November 14, 1895]
South Place Chapel Lecture
"The Swami Vivekananda" enlightened the congregation at South place Chapel last Sunday morning on "The Basis of Vedanta Morality." . .
The Swami explained that in the system of morality which he was expounding actions were not inspired by any hope of reward, here or hereafter, nor by any fear of punishment in this world or in the beyond: "We must work simply from the impetus within, work for work's sake, duty for duty's sake." This idea of morality is claimed to be superior to the religion of Jesus, and so has beguiled some so called Christians into Buddhism or other Eastern philosophies. But the essence of true Christianity is that, if your actions are inspired by the heavenly kingdom within you, Paradise will be the result, whereas, if you act in harmony with the devil's kingdom without you will land in Perdition. The genuine Christian does not, as the Swami seemed to suggest, act for the purpose of evading punishments, but at the same time he sees the ultimate consequences of all actions. . . .
[The Queen, The Lady's Newspaper, November 23, 1895]
Mrs. Haweis's first autumn At home took place last Saturday at Queen's House, when the Indian Yogi, or ascetic, Swami Vive Kananda (Buddhist [sic] delegate at the Parliament of Religions at Chicago in 1893) discussed in a liberal spirit, and not without humour, the chances and the charms of an universal religion. He showed that the underlying principles of all the great religions of the world resembled one another, and amongst the great prophets he placed the Christian Redeemer very high, implying, however, that His teaching was little borne out sometimes by His professed followers. There was no radical impossibility of reconciliation between sects, now biting and devouring each other from the best motives, if charity and sympathy were carried into the kiosque, the temple, and the church. Canon Basil Wilberforce and the Rev. H. R. Haweis both made interesting speeches in reply to the Swami. . . . The guests numbered 150.
[Daily Chronicle, May 14, 1896]
The Sesame Club.--At a meeting of the Sesame Club on Tuesday night [May 12], the chairman, Mr. Ashton Jonson, said he regretted to announce that Mrs. Norman was too unwell to be present to open, as announced, a debate on "Should we return to the land." An address was accordingly given by Swami Vivekananda on the subject of education, in which he urged that no one could obtain intellectual greatness until he was physically pure. Morality gave strength; the immoral were always weak, and could never raise themselves intellectually, much less spiritually. Directly [as] immorality began to enter the national life its foundations commenced to rot. As the life blood of every nation was to be found in the schools, where boys and girls were receiving their education, it was absolutely essential that the young students should be pure, and this purity must be taught them.
[Light, July 4, 1896]
When first we heard that the Swami Vivekananda was coming to London to expound the Vedanta Philosophy, we were hopeful that his teaching would not only confirm the faith of Spiritualists, but might also add to their number. We hoped this, because the very essence of the Hindu Philosophy is that man is a spirit, and has a body, and not that man is a body, and may have a spirit also; which is as far as many a Western mind can reach. . . .
It has been the glorious privilege of our modern Spiritualism to prove by actual demonstration the existence of spirit apart from flesh, and it would, therefore, seem reasonable to look for co operation on the part of the exponents of the Vedanta Philosophy and the supporters of Spiritualism. We are not quite certain, however, that this desirable consummation can be attained, for observations made very recently by the Swami are calculated only to divide the two sects. The Vedanta Philosophy sets before the student an ideal aim! Nothing less, in fact, than the unfolding of the God within him, and nothing could well be more impressive and inspiring than the presentation of this idea by a speaker of the force and eloquence of the Swami. We could only respect and admire, until modern Spiritualism was alluded to, and that in a manner which left upon us the impression that the Swami condemned without reservation all sitting for phenomena. He admitted having sat for observation with professional mediums, and held that one and all had practised fraud. "Spirit voices," according to the Swami, are never heard to clash! As the "sepulchral dies away the small child's voice rises up," intimating thus that ventriloquism was invariably respon sible for the sounds. "Spirit messages," he remarked, were quite worthless, for they never rose above the level of "I am well and happy," or "Give John a piece of cake."
This assertion could, of course, only be made in ignorance of the contents of "Spirit Teachings," a book which, we think, can well stand comparison even with the exalted teaching of the Swami Vivekananda. The process of making up sham materialisations and working the figure on the end of a wire was also described in detail.
We were present again the following evening, when a paper of questions bearing upon the adverse criticism of the Swami was read out to the meeting. Some thirty minutes were then passed in qualifying and explaining his remarks of the night before, and, to our deep satisfaction, the Swami not only confessed his belief in the possibility of spirits communicating with mortals, but even expressed his conviction that at times spirits of a high grade visited earth in order to assist mankind. It is, however, we conceive, no part of the Vedanta Philosophy to recommend the seeking of such intercourse, on account of its possible "dangers." It is commonly held that the undeveloped spirit can most easily communicate with man, consequently the Swami uttered his word of warning and withheld any word of encouragement. . . .
[Light, October 28, 1896]
On the sixth floor of one of the dismal but convenient Victoria street houses, we lately listened to a discourse by Swami Vivekananda--one of a long series on the Hindoo Reli-
A Friday evening class delivered in the summer of 1896, at St. George's Road, of which there is no verbatim transcript available. gion and Philosophy. . . . For an hour and a half he spoke, without a note. It is true that the discourse was rather a flow of remarks than a connected study, but it was all keenly interesting.
The subject, in the main, was the Vedas, but we got excursions upon Evolution, Modern Science, Idealism and Realism, the Supremacy of Spirit, &c. On the whole, we gathered that the speaker was a preacher of the universal religion of spiritual ascendency and spiritual harmony. Certain passages from the Vedas--beautifully translated and read, by the way--were charming in their bearing upon the humanness and sharp reality of a life beyond the veil. One longed for more of this.
We were much impressed with the admission that in the Vedas there were many contradictions, and that devout Hindoos never thought of denying them nor reconciling them. Everyone was free to take what he liked. At different stages and on different planes, all were true. Hence the Hindoos never excommunicated and never persecuted. The contradictions in the Vedas are like the contradictions in life--they are very real, but they are all true. This seems impossible, but there is sound sense in it. At all events, as regards excommunication and persecution, we only wish the Christians could make the Hindoo's claim.
## References
文本来自Wikisource公共领域。原版由阿德瓦伊塔修道院出版。