老側譯者序:本帖向本部落粉絲介紹一篇由一位天主教教士寫的有關一行禪師的文章。文章題目是 Nhat Hanh Is My Brother ,老側在此硬譯為:《一行是我的兄弟》。此文作者叫 Thomas Merton (一般譯作「托馬斯.默頓」),文章見於默頓一本初版於1968年的文集(頁106-8),名為 Faith and Violence: Christian Teaching and Christian Pratice。老側推斷,文章寫於1966年,因當年禪師應和平聯誼會(the Fellowship of Reconciliation)邀請訪美,期間禪師向美國人民講述了越南下層人民在戰爭中所受的痛苦及其和平願望。此文應為默頓對禪師的美國之行的回應。

二十世紀期間世界五大宗教(佛教、天主教、基督新教、伊斯蘭教、印度教)各自有其最為世人所知的思想家和代表性人物。這樣的人物,佛教有一行禪師和第十四世達賴喇嘛,印度教有聖雄甘地(Mahatma Gandhi),伊斯蘭教有麥爾康.艾克斯(Malcolm X),基督新教有小馬丁·路德·金(Martin Luther King Jr),而於天主教,則有上文提及的托馬斯.默頓。(順帶一提:到了今天,這些人物還在世的,只有一行禪師和第十四世達賴喇嘛。歲月流逝之無情,令人唏噓。)

要是老側這樣的泛泛之輩寫了一篇文章,並冠之以《一行是我的兄弟》這題目,放在本部落上,則不但有高攀禪師之嫌,而且也實在不值一讀,即使是本部落粉絲,相信也會清醒地拒絕浪費時間去讀它。但是,正如一行禪師和第十四世達賴喇嘛非泛泛之輩而是佛教界的思想翹楚那樣,托馬斯.默頓也並非泛泛之輩而是天主教界的思想翹楚。因此,《一行是我的兄弟》就不是一般的文章,而是一個卓越的宗教思想家公開地對另一宗教的卓越思想家表示認同甚至贊賞的一篇文章。在上世紀六十年代的那個時代背景,作出這樣的言論是需要莫大的胸襟和勇氣的。老側敬重默頓的胸襟和勇氣,也就覺得應當向本部落粉絲介紹此文章。

此外,我們也可以從《一行是我的兄弟》一文中,多少知道一行禪師早於上世紀六十年代的事蹟和面對的困難。禪師自上世紀四十年代出家至今,弘法超過半世紀。今年禪師已達84歲高齡,仍計劃於今年十一月來港主持弘法活動(詳情可參閱以下連結:http://zen.buddhistdoor.com/index.html)。他的佛教理念,世人稱之為Engaged Buddhism,自六十年代初,有鑑於越南戰爭對同胞(法師是越南人)的殘害,已以其特有的和平方式投身反對越戰的社會活動。默頓的《一行是我的兄弟》,相信是基於一種惺惺相惜的情感而寫成的。

一行禪師的英文名字,一般寫成「Thich Nhat Hanh」。此名是出自越南文,更嚴謹的寫法應是「Thích Nhất Hạnh」。「Nhất Hạnh」是禪師的法號,漢譯就是「一行」,「Thích 」相等於漢字「釋」。漢傳佛教中對僧人的稱呼,一般會在其法號前加上「釋」字,例如老側的師父衍空法師也可稱為「釋衍空」。同樣,越南僧侶的名字也可在其法號前冠之以「Thích 」,故「Nhất Hạnh」也可稱為「Thích Nhất Hạnh」。默頓在文章中稱一行禪師為「Nhat Hanh」,直呼其法號,相信是要表示兄弟般的親切。

老側可有可無的囉嗦到此為止。重要的是默頓的文章,以下請粉絲們細閱。如看譯文看得一頭霧水,不知道默頓想説什麼,則罪不在默頓,更不在粉絲,僅在老側翻譯水平低也。如此則請眾粉絲見諒,並直接看譯文下面的英文原文。

另外,本帖面世後,有讀者向老側提供資料,近期互聯網上有兩篇有關一行禪師的文章。一篇題為Love & Liberation: An Interview with Thich Nhat Hanh,是訪問錄,紀錄了禪師在一次訪問中就好些佛教修行的中心問題如正念與苦、樂的關係等問題的看法;另一篇題為Peace in Every Step: Thich Nhat Hanh’s Life of Courage and Compassion,介紹禪師推動Engaged Buddhism的事蹟。眾粉絲如有興趣一讀,可點擊以下連結:
訪問錄http://iamhome.org/articles/SHAMBHALA%20SUN_July10_TNH_Interview.pdf
事蹟http://iamhome.org/articles/SHAMBHALA%20SUN_July10_TNH_Profile.pdf

一行是我的兄弟》譯文:

       這文章不是政治聲明,也不是對越南戰爭中「支持」或「反對」此方或彼方的回應。相反地,它是從人出發的、個人的聲明,也是為我的兄弟釋一行作出的極度痛苦的呼籲。與釋一行相比,很多人在種族和國籍上和我更為相近,但釋一行卻比這些人更是我的兄弟,因為他和我對事物的看法完全相同。他和我都強烈譴責那正在蹂躪他國家的戰爭。我們基於完全一致的理由譴責這戰爭:從人出發的理由、從理智、正義和愛出發的理由。我們譴責那無謂的破壞、譴責那對人命荒唐和無情的肆虐、譴責那對一個筋疲力盡的民族的文化和精神的蹂躪。確切而明顯的是,這場殺戮無助於實現任何目的,也確實和那強國的目的互相矛盾,這強國自命是它正在摧毀的民族的「保衛者」。

        當然,這聲明難免是為和平而作的呼籲,但也是為我的兄弟一行而作的呼籲。 一行代表着越南境內所有運動中最不「政治」的運動。他與那些嘗試透過政治支配手段去拯救國家的佛教徒並無直接的關連。他絕對不是共產黨人;越共對他充滿敵意。現存政府憎惡他,不信任他,而他也拒絕被視為與它同一陣線。他代表的,是那些年輕、無防禦能力的青年新階層。這些青年發現,除了與他們並肩勞動的農民和窮人外,所有人都在對付他們。倘若在越南還有所謂越南這個民族的話,一行是真確地在為越南民族說話的。

        一行離開他的國家,來到我們這裏,為的是向我們展示一幅我們的報章和雜誌沒有向我們提供的圖畫。在這裏他是受到歡迎的 – 而這恰當地說明了那些歡迎他的人。他這次訪美顯示了我們這人民,在可以尋求真相時仍然渴求真相,在擁有公平機會去為人類對抗政治機器時也仍然會如此選擇。但一行回家後會有什麼遭遇呢?那壓制他的作品的政府不會禮待他。越共會敵視他與美國的連繫。他就結束戰爭而作出的呼籲,將令他在某些人眼中成為叛徒,這些人只要戰爭繼續下去,只要他們的同胞繼續被殺害,只要能繼續與我們的軍方做生意,就能得到個人的好處。一行回去後,可能會被投進監牢,可能會被折磨,甚至可能會喪命。我們不能一邊安坐這裏、享受那因着對還沒結束的戰爭懷抱美好的意願和有意義的情緒而感受到的人道主義溫暖,一邊讓他回西貢去送命。我們這些跟一行見過面、聽過他說話的人,或者是讀過有關他的材料的,都必須為要求在他回國後生命和自由得到尊重而吶喊。再者,我們這樣要求,並非為了任何可以想見的政治好處,而純粹是基於自由和人道等價值觀,我們的武裝力量就是以這些價值觀為理由宣布打這場越戰的。一行是一個自由的人,一個為弟兄而行動的、受宗教慈悲傳統的精神動力驅動的人。如同很多其他的人那樣,他來到了我們中間,一次又一次地見證着禪的精神。沒有人能像他那樣更能向我們顯示,禪不是什麼只顧內省不問世事的小圈子極端宗教,而是在現代世界中擁有着罕有而獨特的責任感的。不管一行到了哪裏,他都會以他的精神力量、以一位看透生死的禪師的獨處邁着他的步伐。我們必須高聲吶喊,要求他在回到他那久經摧殘的國家後,生命和尊嚴得到充分的尊重,並能夠繼續他那基於對重建國家的一天的到來在學生和農民中間的工作。我們必須這樣做,既是為了他的安全,也是為了我們自己的榮譽。

        我説過:一行是我的兄弟。這是真的。我們都是僧侶,都過了差不多年數的寺院生活。我們都是詩人,也都是存在主義者。我和一行之間的共通之處,遠比我和很多美國人的共通之處要多。我是毫不猶豫地這樣説的。承認這些連結是非常重要的。這些連結體現一種新的團結、新的手足情誼。這新的團結開始見於五大洲,並超越一切政治、宗教、文化的界線,比理想更具體地、比方案更生動地將每個國家年青的男男女女聯合起來。這年青人的聯合,是世界唯一希望之所在。我以它之名,為一行作出呼籲,為他竭盡我之所能。倘若你愛護我,那就讓我這樣説吧:請為一行做任何的事,如同我身處他的位置的話你會為我做任何事那樣。很多時候我真希望能身處他的位置。

English original of Thomas Merton’s Nhat Hanh Is My Brother: 

       This is not a political statement. It has no immediate reaction “for” or “against” this or that side in the Vietnam war. It is on the contrary a human and personal statement and an anguished plea for Thich Nhat Hanh who is my brother. He is more my brother than many who are nearer to me by race and nationality, because he and I see things exactly the same way. He and I deplore the war that is ravaging his country. We deplore it for exactly the same reasons: human reasons, reasons of sanity, justice and love. We deplore the needless destruction, the fantastic and callous ravaging of human life, the rape of the culture and spirit of an exhausted people. It is surely evident that this carnage serves no purpose that can be discerned and indeed contradicts the very purpose of the mighty nation that has constituted itself of “defender” of the people it is destroying.

        Certainly this statement cannot help being a plea for peace. But it is also a plea for my Brother Nhat Hanh. He represents the least “political” of all the movements in Vietnam. He is not directly associated with the Buddhists who are trying to use political manipulation in order to save their country. He is by no means a Communist. The Vietcong is deeply hostile to him. He refuses to be identified with the established government which hates and distrusts him. He represents the young, the defenseless, the new ranks of youth who find themselves with every hand turned against them except those of the peasants and the poor, with whom they are working. Nhat Hanh speaks truly for the people of Vietnam, if there can be said to be a “people” still left in Vietnam.

        Nhat Hanh has left his country and has come to us in order to present a picture which is not given us in our newspapers and magazines. He has been well received – and that speaks well for those who have received him. His visit to the United States has shown that we are a people who still desire the truth when we can find it, and still decide in favor of man against the political machine when we get a fair chance to do so. But when Nhat Hanh goes home, what will happen to him? He is not in favor with the government which has suppressed his writings. The Vietcong will view with disfavor his American contacts. To have pleaded for an end to the fighting will make him a traitor in the eyes of those who stand to gain personally as long as the war goes on, as long as their countrymen are being killed, as long as they can do business with our military. Nhat Hanh may be returning to imprisonment, torture, even death. We cannot let him go back to Saigon to be destroyed while we sit here, cherishing the warm humanitarian glow of good intentions and worthy sentiments about the ongoing war. We who have met and heard Nhat Hanh, or who have read about him, must also raise our voices to demand that his life and freedom be respected when he returns to his country. Furthermore, we demand this not in terms of any conceivable political advantage, but purely in the name of those values of freedom and humanity in favor of which our armed forces declare they are fighting the Vietnam war. Nhat Hanh is a free man who has acted as a free man in favor of his brothers and moved by the spiritual dynamic of a tradition of religious compassion. He has come among us as many others have, from time to time, bearing witness to the spirit of Zen. More than any other he has shown to us that Zen is not an esoteric and world denying cult of inner illumination, but that it has its rare and unique sense of responsibility in the modern world. Wherever he goes he will walk in the strength of his spirit and in the solitude of the Zen monk who sees beyond life and death. It is for our own honor as much as for his safety that we must raise our voices to demand that his life and personal integrity be fully respected when he returns to his smashed and gutted country, there to continue his work with the students and peasants, hoping for the day when reconstruction can begin.

        I have said Nhat Hanh is my brother, and it is true. We are both monks, and we have lived the monastic life about the same number of years. We are both poets, both existentialists. I have far more in common with Nhat Hanh than I have with many Americans, and I do not hesitate to say it. It is vitally important that such bonds be admitted. They are the bonds of a new solidarity and a new brotherhood which is beginning to be evident on all the five continents and which cuts across all political, religious and cultural lines to unite young men and women in every country in something that is more concrete than an ideal and more alive than a program. This unity of the young is the only hope of the world. In its name I appeal for Nhat Hanh. Do what I can for him. If I mean something to you, then let me put it this way: do for Nhat Hanh whatever you would do for me if I were in his position. In many ways I wish I were.