Chapter One

YOU ARE NOT YOUR MIND

THE GREATEST OBSTACLE TO ENLIGHTENMENT

Enlightenment — what is that?

A beggar had been sitting by the side of a road for over thirty years. One day a stranger walked by. "Spare some change?" mumbled the beggar, mechanically holding out his old baseball cap. "I have nothing to give you," said the stranger. Then he asked: "What's that you are sitting on? " " Nothing," replied the beggar. "Just an old box. I have been sitting on it for as long as I can remember. " " Ever looked inside?" asked the stranger. "No," said the beggar. "What’s the point? There's nothing in there." "Have a look inside," insisted the stranger. The beggar managed to pry open the lid. With astonishment, disbelief, and elation, he saw that the box was filled with gold.

    I am that stranger who has nothing to give you and who is telling you to look inside. Not inside any box, as in the parable, but somewhere even closer, inside yourself.

    "But I am not a beggar," I can hear you say.

Those who have not found their true wealth, which is the radiant joy of Being and the deep, unshakable peace that comes with it, are beggars, even if they have great material wealth. They are looking outside for scraps of pleasure or fulfillment, for validation, security, or love, while they have a treasure within that not only includes all those things but is infinitely greater than anything the world can offer.

The word enlightenment conjures up the idea of some superhuman accomplishment, and the ego likes to keep it that way, but it is simply your natural state of felt oneness with Being.    It is finding your true nature beyond name and form. The inability to feel this connectedness gives rise to the illusion of separation, from yourself and from the world around you. You then perceive yourself, consciously or unconsciously, as an isolated fragment. Fear arises, and conflict within and without becomes the norm.

I love the Buddha's simple definition of enlightenment as "the end of suffering." There is nothing superhuman in that, is there? Of course, as a definition, it is incomplete. It only tells you what enlightenment is not: no suffering. But what's left when there is no more suffering? The Buddha is silent on that, and his silence implies that you'll have to find out for yourself. He uses a negative definition so that the mind cannot make it into something to believe in or into a superhuman accomplishment, a goal that is impossible for you to attain. Despite this precaution, the majority of Buddhists still believe that enlightenment is for the Buddha, not for them, at least not in this lifetime.

You used the word Being. Can you explain what you mean by that?

Being is the eternal, ever-present One Life beyond the myriad forms of life that are subject to birth and death. However, Being is not only beyond but also deep within every form as its innermost invisible and indestructible essence. This means that it is accessible to you now as your own deepest self, your true nature. But don't seek to grasp it with your mind. Don't try to understand it. You can know it only when the mind is still. When you are present, when your attention is fully and intensely in the Now, Being can be felt, but it can never be understood mentally. To regain awareness of Being and to abide in that state of "feeling-realization" is enlightenment.

§

When you say Being, are you talking about God? If you are, then why don't you say it?

The word God has become empty of meaning through thousands of years of misuse. I use it sometimes, but I do so sparingly. By misuse, I mean that people who have never even glimpsed the realm of the sacred, the infinite vastness behind that word, use it with great conviction, as if they knew what they are talking about. Or they argue against it, as if they knew what it is that they are denying. This misuse gives rise to absurd beliefs, assertions, and egoic delusions, such as "My or our God is the only true God, and your God is false," or Nietzsche's famous statement "God is dead."

The word God has become a closed concept. The moment the word is uttered, a mental image is created, no longer, perhaps, of an old man with a white beard, but still a mental representation of someone or something outside you, and, yes, almost inevitably a male someone or something.

第一章
 你不等于你的大脑

开悟的最大障碍

开悟（enlightenment）是什么？

曾经，有个乞丐在路边坐了30多年。一天，一位陌生人经过。这个乞丐机械地举起他的旧棒球帽，喃喃地说：“给点儿吧。”陌生人说：“我没有什么东西可以给你。”然后他问：“你坐着的是什么？”乞丐回答说：“什么都没有，只是一个旧箱子而已，自从我有记忆以来，我就一直坐在它上面。”陌生人问：“你曾经打开过箱子吗？”“没有。”乞丐说，“有什么用？里面什么都没有。”陌生人坚持：“打开箱子看一看。”乞丐这才试着打开箱子。这时令人意想不到的事情发生了，乞丐充满了惊奇与狂喜：箱子里装满了金子。

我就是那位没有任何东西可给你，却要求你打开箱子看看的陌生人。我不是让你像这则寓言里的乞丐一样看什么箱子，而是叫你往一个更贴近你自身的地方看：你的内在。

我能清晰地听到你说：“可是，我不是个乞丐呀。”

那些没有找到他们真正的财富，也就是本体的喜悦以及与它紧密联系在一起的、深刻而不可动摇的宁静的人，就是乞丐，即使他们有很多物质上的财富。他们四处寻找成就、安全感或爱情所残余的欢乐或满足，但是他们不知道自己不仅已经拥有了所有的这些东西，而且还拥有了比这些更为珍贵的东西。

“开悟”这个词听起来就像一些超人类成就的玄学，但是，它其实就是一种简单的与本体合一的自然状态。它是一种与不可衡量的、不可摧毁的事物相联系的状态。几乎矛盾的是，它其实就是你自己，但又比你更伟大。它找到了超越你名字和形象的真正本质。如果你不能感觉到这种联系，你就会有一种与自己以及与你周围的世界相分离的幻象。你会有意识或无意识地感到自己就像一个孤立的碎片。然后，你内外部的恐惧、冲突和矛盾也随之产生。

我喜欢佛陀将开悟简单地定义为“受苦的终结”（the end of suffering）。在这个定义里没有超人类观念的存在。当然，作为定义，它是不完整的。它仅告诉你开悟的否定性定义：受苦停止。但是，当没有受苦存在时，还剩下什么呢？佛陀对此沉默不语。他的沉默意味着你必须自己去寻找答案。他下了一个否定形式的定义，所以你不会认为开悟是一个超人类的成就或不可达到的目标。尽管这样，绝大部分佛教徒仍然没有体会佛陀的苦心，仍然相信开悟是为佛而准备的，而不属于他们，至少在此生中不属于他们。

关于本体（being）这个词，你能解释一下它的含义吗？

本体是超越那些受限于生死的各种生命形式而永在的“至一生命”。作为无形的、不灭的本质，本体不仅超越了所有生命形式，更深深地根植于每种生命形式之中。也就是说，作为你最深的自我和真实的本质，你可以在每个当下接触到它。别试着去掌握它的含义，别试着去理解它。只有当你的思维处于静止时，你才会领会它的真正含义。当你的思维处于静止时，当你的注意力完全集中在当下时刻时，你就会感觉到本体，但是从心智上我们永远无法理解它。重新觉知到本体，并保持这种觉知体验的状态就是开悟。

***

你谈到的“本体”，是指上帝吗？如果是这样，为什么不直接说呢？

经过上千年的滥用，“上帝”这个词的意义已经变得很空洞。我有时用“上帝”这个词，但极少这样做。这里的滥用指的是人们在从未理解这个词的真谛的基础上就自以为是地去运用它，像是很了解它的样子，或是极力地反对它，好像很清楚他们在反对的究竟是什么似的。这种滥用就引发了可笑的信仰、结论以及自大的幻象，比如：我的或我们的上帝是唯一的真正的上帝，而你们的上帝则是假的，或如尼采说的“上帝死了”。

“上帝”这个词已经成了一个封闭的概念。当人们说出这个词时，他们就会构想一个形象出来，也许不会是一位白胡子的老人，但是仍然还是一个置身于你之外的人或是物，同时不免是个男性或雄性的形象。