简体 | 正體 | EN | GE | FR | SP | BG | RUS | JP | VN 西藏密宗真相 首頁 | 訪客留言 | 用戶登錄 | 用户登出

二、空行母的來源與演變：從印度到西藏

空行母，是從印度到西藏密教的一種特殊形象，與這兩個文化區域的女性崇拜有關，李南云：

密 教金剛乘的女神中，又有各種智慧神、方位神、保護神、舞神、門神、光神、獸面神、瑜伽女、荼吉尼（空行母）等等，……這些神的造像或銅雕石刻，或泥塑彩 繪，大量出現在石窟、廟宇裡，為修行者的觀想修習提供了極大的方便，並吸引了眾多的善男信女，是密教金剛乘一時得以廣泛傳播的重要原因之一。……密教主張 以方便（悲）為父，以般若（慧）為母，因此便以雙身佛相擁交合作為「悲智和合」的表徵。……特別要提一下荼吉尼，她們是以婦女形象出現的象徵物，在修習時對她們進行冥想。她們通常面目猙獰，飾物駭人，與印度恐怖女神難近母一脈相承，常不穿衣，有的只有獨眼、獨腿。然而她們由於認識到「空」而從塵世中解脫，翱翔在精神領域的高空，為秘密知識的傳授者。

密教在印度鼎盛的時期，曾有著為數眾多的女修習者。在密教中她們常被冠以用於女神的尊稱。……稱之為荼吉尼則是認為她們猶如空行母一般，由於認識到「空」性而從人世間解脫，在悟得正道的精神領域中自由飛翔；……（密教、印度教的性力派）認為宇宙是由女性的創造力產生的，因而女性的力量從本體論上說就是原初的，第一位的，而男性的力量則是派生的，從屬的，故而男性在社會關係以及儀軌關係上都應依從婦女。

密宗發展到無上瑜伽部時，女性神佛數量空前，地位日升。她們當中，有些女神一直是重要的佛母或菩薩；有些女神在剛出現時原本地位較低，而後發展成為教派崇拜的中心；還有的女神曾經是男主神的明妃，後來地位逐漸提升，最終佔據了怛特羅壇城的中心，而其男性伴侶反倒受到排擠。

這些密教金剛乘的女神，多數起源於古印度（雅利安人入侵之前）母系社會的「生殖」崇拜，後來在印度教中發展為性力派，從「生殖」本能的迷思，轉為對女性（神）及其性器官的崇拜，再透過「性交」與她們合一，並分享她們的能量（性力）。傳入西藏之後，這種性力又摻雜了「苯教」巫術的魔力，並附會了「佛教」空性的思想而自稱為藏傳的佛教。以下分述之。

（一）印度教性力派(Shaktism)與左道密教

印度教以梵天、毗濕奴、濕婆等三大神為主；濕婆是毀滅之神，也是生殖之神，由對於濕婆神之威力崇拜，而引出生殖力及女神的崇拜；林伽（Linga）是濕婆的性器，生殖則由其妻卡利（K?l?）擔任，故而分化出女神的「性力」崇拜。……（待續）

一貫道的「剽竊」本質

─以「彌陀淨土」及「正法眼藏」為例

摘要

一 貫道乃歷經數百年，吸取多種民間宗教之內涵，糅合演變而成的信仰組織。在大陸被取締之後，轉進臺灣七十年，快速發展且推向國際，篤信「無生老母」為萬靈真 宰、「理天」為原胎佛子的歸處，以及「龍華三會」末劫年「彌勒古佛」掌天盤……。其道統傳承及教法理論是標榜三教一致、兼收並蓄，並依虛妄想像的「先天之 道」一以貫之；近代又擴大其範圍為五教合一，表面看似乎具備「理一而分殊」的哲學創見與宗教體悟，若細析其名相與觀念，卻不外乎「剽竊」的本質。凡是在宗 教上有信眾有市場的宗教，一貫道都要竊來充實、妝點自家門面，卻不問他教是否同意，此舉已招來佛教信眾與基督教徒的破斥；雖然部分一貫道人士也有回應，但 所作的解釋與引證，徒然又一次自信己意地曲解與強辯，越描越黑，不能圓場。

本 論文的重點先從一貫道自編的傳承歷史去爬梳每個轉型階段，竊他教之法以為己用、應時局之變以求生存的事實，道教─佛教─新儒學，羅教─彌勒─白蓮教……乃 至基督─阿拉，無所不竊，一以貫之。如此以竊為業，雜湊糅合，牽強附會，混淆天下人耳目的傳承，才是它潛在而根本的致命傷；也就是欠缺「自證的體驗」與 「自創的教義」，只能依草附木，竊取其他宗教的名相與法義之後，加以扭曲與變造，自以為後來居上而喧賓奪主；這種不誠實、不坦蕩的行徑，雖部分來自初始時 期民間宗教崛起的雜糅拼 湊性格，立教之後卻又變本加厲，竊取他教教義以後，以下犯上地貶低各教教主與教義而持續不斷，乃至別創明明上帝（無生老母）以君臨天下、統攝五教……。從 一貫道的「道統」捏造及「教義」胡扯，可以顯見它為了證明其道貫千聖且統領諸教，不惜將竊取其他宗教的贓物與手法，列成清單、到處販賣，唯恐天下人不知， 這可說是明目張膽而且愚昧的行為，故一貫道的本質為一貫盜──吾道一貫以「盜」行之。

其次，特就一貫道竊自佛法的兩個內涵─淨土「阿彌陀佛」及禪宗「正法眼藏」─而加以附會改造為「理天」與「玄關一竅」為例，詳考細論以揭發其「竊而無道」的粗劣手法；此行為類似竊車集團，四處竊來各家高檔名車，拆解之後重新拼裝，雖然所有零件分別來自各大名車，也足以炫耀，而整體卻是四不像，機件之間互相矛盾、牽制，只能千驚萬險、勉為其難的混過去，可能無法行駛很久就會解體而發生車禍，或者被拆穿其仿冒與竊盜的實質。

彌 陀淨土是佛教信仰法門之一，持念彌陀聖號可於命終往生極樂，繼續成佛之道的實修。一貫道前身先天道的發展過程中，彌陀信仰是重要的內涵，自詡為彌勒信仰的 一貫道卻將阿彌陀佛變裝為萬靈真宰，掌天盤者；極樂世界則成了原胎佛子未來的出生地─理天。雖然歷經久年之後，現今一貫道的書籍已覓不著彌陀信仰的訊息， 但仍有蛛絲馬跡可尋；也就是說，從先天道到一貫道，其仿效的信仰內涵由彌陀信仰變成彌勒信仰，這中間如何的轉變，是本文所要探討之一貫道雜竊、多變的本 質！

「無 生老母」、「三期末劫」、「三曹普渡」、「三寶心法」是現今一貫道之基本教義，這些教義中以「三寶心法」為核心，而三寶又以「玄關一竅」最殊勝。一貫道將 其視為亙久不輕傳的密意，甚至認為玄關一竅就是禪宗的「正法眼藏」；本文先論述正法眼藏在佛法之實際意涵（真實心如來藏），對照一貫道如何另作定位與詮 釋，進而探討「玄關一竅」是否符合佛教正法眼藏之聖教量，以及以之作為明心見性之樞紐是否為非法妄語？

最後，對一貫道以剽竊於五教而拼裝的教理施設與修行次第，是否具備「超生了死」、「收圓返鄉」及「得道成佛」的功德受用，或只是停留於世俗法的表相勸善？若據此以自修並推廣，其能到達的結果又如何？以上列種種依佛教正法研究比對所得的結論，提供一貫道高層及信眾們參考、三思。

關鍵字：玄關一竅、超生了死、正法眼藏、三寶心法、無生老母、理天、三期末劫、彌陀信仰、彌勒信仰、剽竊、盜法。

內文：

一、前言

當今民 主時代，各宗教雖有建構、弘揚自家教義的自由，然而一貫道信徒中有許多是為了追求「解脫」乃至「成佛」之真理與實證，只是因緣不足或被一貫道誤導而進入此 「非佛教」的宗教體系，依彼所教而修行一輩子，卻不得佛法之功德受用，亦不知所學所修乃心外求法之教；因此，基於辨正佛法與一貫道之差異，令學人知所分別 而抉擇，故寫作本文。

從 義理與歷史的雙重論述以確定所謂「佛教」，本質是能令學人親證法界實相，且具備客觀真理的意義，此乃是佛教之體。其次，有所謂「相似佛教」，雖承認佛法僧 三寶，於教理行果的施設中卻多有違反佛教之聖教量，表面相似實不同。至於「非佛教」者，乃不承認佛教、不歸依三寶者，即所謂的外道。

以 上三者之區分，對於佛教（真理）流布的如法性，及學人獲得佛法正知見的確保性，是有重大意義的。世間一切實證佛法的菩薩、祖師，於其說法、論著中必先歸依 三寶、讚仰佛陀，不可能外於釋迦牟尼佛而另立教主、另開教法。準此而言，一貫道雖竊用佛教名相與思想，卻不以「佛法僧」為依止，而另立「玄關、口訣、合同」為三寶，並曲解佛理以詮釋之，成了所謂的「附佛外道」。

一個宗教的「道統」敘述，涉及其義理的源流與傳承，也涉及其修證的內涵。佛教的義理是可實證的，其修行次第是完備的，故後世弟子可依此而實修親驗，也才有所謂「道統」傳承的實質可言。但在一貫道書籍《道統寶鑑》的〈歷代統緒大略〉中言：「孟子以後心法失傳，天命暗轉釋門，……釋迦牟尼奉天承運，道統一脈相傳，後傳大弟子摩訶迦葉。」此後即將所謂的「西天二十八祖」「東土六祖」表列於後，再續入一貫道的七祖白玉蟾與馬端陽、八祖羅蔚群、九祖黃德輝……十八祖張天然。就其所列之道脈源流似屬佛教禪宗，然而，這是一貫道的實證法脈嗎？還是攀緣附會以混人耳目？又於公開傳教中標榜自己是紹繼禪宗六祖， 承達摩祖師的密法，自云其心法「玄關一竅」就是禪門「正法眼藏」，是明心見性之樞紐，儼然自居為佛教真傳；卻又誑稱是三曹普渡、一步直超之「天道」正統，落入三界生死中。而現今的一貫道自詡為彌勒信仰，與其所承襲的「先天道」傳統信仰不同，後者在「理天」的初始建構、後來「無生老母」的演變與「龍華三會」救世主角色的轉變中，都有「彌陀信仰」的痕跡。這其間傳承定位與信仰內涵的變化，都透露出其教門之雜竊與多變的性格。

對於上述問題，本文試從明清之際民間宗教與先天道之文獻去釐清一貫道所承襲之教派，以及一貫道雜取各種不同宗教而混同之，隨意拼湊而自相矛盾的教理結構，以呈現其剽竊、變造、佔有之「剽竊」本質。尤其針對一貫道從佛法中竊取的兩個主題「正法眼藏」與「彌陀信仰」，追溯其竊用名相之因緣及變造內涵之過程，以及佔為己有之結果，詳細論析其不誠實、不正知而又廣宣其教、誤導群眾的剽竊心態；並進而說明一貫道以剽竊手段而施設的教理解說與修行次第，最多也只是世俗法的人倫勸善而已，依此而信受而修行，絕無可能如所誑稱的超生了死，出離三界！因為，這是唯有「佛法」修證才達得到的成就，一貫道雖經歷數百年與佛教的曖昧關係，卻從未理解佛法真實義，更不曾實修佛法道次第，因此，與三乘佛法既不相應，又如何獲致「佛法」的功德與受用？此一必然結果將於後面舉證辨析。……（待續）

二、從一貫道的歷史傳承透視其剽竊→變造→佔有之本質

一貫道有著數百年的歷史，從其八祖羅蔚群至十祖吳紫祥（1715-1784），適逢各類民間通俗宗教從明代中末葉以來，即已風靡大江南北的年代。有多少民間宗教直接或間接影響一貫道的形成及教義的傳承，是值得去注意和探討的。

據林萬傳先生在其著作《先天道研究》中指出：「一貫道之教義大體上仍沿襲先天道，惟為因應時代趨勢，做了若干改革而已。」雖說先天道道統系譜九祖以前的各祖師，是教徒基於心法、義理而遙接的傳承，並非歷史的遞代。但這些心法與義理，卻又是某些民間宗教所發展延伸出來的，所以由先天道的道統加以反溯，即可清理一貫道的歷史傳承。

（一）一貫道探源

先天道於同治年間（1862-1874）分裂，各派系獨自發展其道務及訂定道統，到了清末山東東震堂王覺一（1821-1884）一系發展成後來的一貫道。是以一貫道前身乃清代的先天道，但先天道在清代官方的文書檔案中，有青蓮教、金丹道、齋匪等稱號。甚至也有大乘教之稱，如嘉慶二十五年（1820）的《護道榜文》事件記載，貴州都勻府丹江廳大乘教徒龍燕海，當時吐供云：

我係貴州都勻府丹江廳人……康熙六年，有素習大乘教的直隸民人羅維行領了官給的《護道榜文》在外傳教。後羅維行四傳至江西民人何弱為徒，何弱得了《榜文》，到貴州省內習教……

康熙六年（1667）於江西傳大乘教之直隸民人羅維行，多位學者認為他就是一貫道的第八祖羅蔚群。另據馬西沙先生的研究，引文中的何弱即一貫道所稱第十一祖何若（？-1800），而何若之師吳子祥即一貫道第十祖吳紫祥（1715-1784），此兩人清代檔案記錄多處，行跡鑿鑿。再據嘉慶十一年（1806）八月護理江西巡撫先福奏審吳文春的奏摺，所附吳文春所藏符籙清楚的記載著，善字號吃齋者奉黃廷臣、吳子祥為祖師，以及依吳文春符籙的書寫順序來看，黃廷臣為吳子祥的前輩祖師。以及據馬西沙先生的研究，雍正十二年（1734）江西發生的圓頓教案中的黃廷臣（即黃上選、黃榮萬）就是一貫道傳說中的黃九祖黃德輝（1684-1750）。而且據林萬傳先生的研究，黃德輝曾拜羅維行為師。因此，從清代檔案的記載，所謂羅維行的四傳應該就是羅維行、黃德輝、吳子祥與何若，也就是後來一貫道所稱之八祖至十一祖。……（待續）

Historical Right, Historical Responsibility and Historians

Abstract

Although it is extremely important, the scope of the historian is a topic that very few people explore in historiography. Using historical right as the characteristic of the historian, this article defines the scope of the historian. Among many different opinions about the content of historical right, this article thinks the right to select and interpret parts of facts to manifest their knowledge and value is the historical right of the historian.

The reason why the historian has the historical right is that the historical facts are too huge to record all of them, and a historian has to write about the essential parts selected from countless facts. The author of this article expresses a different view on the topic about “the historian, who manages official documents to assist in the governing of a country” and thinks the historical right defined by the author is completely different from the official historian’s governing power, which will hinder the execution of historical right. With this view, this article clearly defines the connotation of historical right and clarifies the real characteristic of the historian.

Historical responsibility comes with the corresponding historical right. With the historical right, a historian should bear the responsibility for the history which he manifests. The historical responsibility is not given to a historian by anyone; it is a definite phenomenon generated by the continuous operation of the “grandly unified” causality rule in the dharma-realm. The execution of historical right by a historian is in fact to write the rules in his mind; it is the historical right of a historian.

Generally there are three layers of meaning for the grandly unified historical responsibility: The first is the minor precepts of conduct; the second is the unique causality rule of grand unification; the highest layer is the ultimate origin of causality rule—the eighth vijnana Tathagatagarbha. All three layers of the historical responsibility should not be violated when a historian executes his historical right.

According to the characteristic of historical right, this article finds both journalists and media workers are historians in conformity to the characteristic of historical right. Furthermore, everyone and even all sentient beings of ten dharma-realms are historians too. It is because every sentient being of ten dharma-realms is the subject of history; everyone has the historical right to write the rules with one’s bodily, verbal and mental deeds, and has no choice but to bear the due historical responsibility; therefore the ten dharma-realms are built. Among the ten dharma-realms, the sages and saints of the four noble dharma-paths are true historians, whereas the sentient beings of the six ordinary karma-paths are false historians. This is a reduced scope of the historian.

Keywords: historian, historical right, historical responsibility, writing the rules, seven noble precepts, five supernatural powers, five insights, grand unification, distortion of the facts, Confucian ethical code, Tathagatagarbha, double standard, balance of power, journalist, media, theory of public opinion

1. Introduction

The scope of history includes all existing facts. Historians collect, read and digest huge amounts of detailed historical data; they construct and interpret the evolution of history. However, historical researches are enormous and complex; with time, more and more historians are needed to participate in research; on the other hand, it seems that historical researches also become endless as time goes by.Liang Qichao, a modern historian, states in Research Methods of Chinese History:

For two thousand years, the historical study in our country has been uniquely flourishing as compared to those of other countries. Nevertheless, its writing system was mostly created by those scholars over a thousand years ago. The historical system needed at that time is quite different from that of today. The knowledge of that time was still not divided into subdisciplines. All different fields of knowledge were recorded by history. Therefore, the scope of history was extraordinarily wide. With the passing years, the number of history books has been increasing, even to the extent that no one can read all of them throughout one’s entire lifetime. As we live in present days, reading old history books is just like “sifting gold from sand, in which valuable things are often found.” Without sand, there would be no gold. However, it is indeed an extremely laborious task to obtain a piece of gold from several decaliters of sand; moreover, not everyone can have the technique of sifting gold. If one goes the wrong way, it will be inevitable that one obtains sand instead of gold. Unfortunately, the current education of history in China is exactly like that.

Liang Qichao thinks that “all different fields of knowledge were recorded by history.” Obviously, in the extremely wide range of historical data, due to the limited space, what is recorded in history should be the knowledge that is beneficial to later generations, rather than those useless data. Liang Qichao further states: “However, it is indeed an extremely laborious task to obtain a piece of gold from several decaliters of sand; moreover, not everyone can have the technique of sifting gold.” It is obvious that the historical contents recorded by historians are not all useful mundane wisdom or knowledge. If Liang’s statement that “it is indeed an extremely laborious task to obtain a piece of gold from several decaliters of sand” is true, what were recorded by historians is in fact rich in sand instead of gold, and useful wisdom or knowledge is scarcely found. Moreover, if useful wisdom or knowledge is to be found, the readers need to have the technique of sifting gold; without the technique of sifting gold, one would be unable to obtain useful wisdom or knowledge. Worst of all, “it is inevitable that historians obtain sand instead of gold.” In that case, historians bring disaster to later generations by transmitting sand to them.……（continue）

2. Historical Right and Historians

This article attempts to explore the scope of the historian. The characteristics of the historian should be clarified first. Chinese historians always like to mention the establishment of official historian system and consider it to be one of the important factors in the well-developed Chinese historiography. However, the occupational historical officer is not a characteristic of the historian. The reason is that although there was no historical officer in ancient society, it does not impede the propagation of historical facts. Although the Western society established the official historian system later, historians still existed before the establishment of official historian system, and it does not impede the development and advancement of Western history. In describing the Chinese official historian system, Du Weiyun states:

The Western world did not establish an official historian system to record the world events immediately. … As for Greeks, who initiated historical study, they had already had a lot of political experiences up to the 7^th century BC. It was strange that the Greeks at that time did not think of recording their experiences in written words. They only paid attention to the history provided in epic poems. As a result, Greeks still did not have plentiful records in written words until the 5^th century BC. That was the situation at that time, and no wonder Western historians disappointedly said, “At first, the stimulation to record historical events did not come from the interest in the past, the so-called interest in history. The forerunner of historical study was full of surprises; it seemed unlikely that, in the beginning, the duty of the so-called historian has its origins in history.” In contrast, the situation in China was entirely different. Since distant ancient times, China had established an official historian system to record the world events immediately, which never happened before. The time when China established an official historian system might not be as early as that told in legends. Cangjie and Jusong, the inventors of Chinese characters, were probably not the ancestors of official historians. However, in the Shang Dynasty or the Xia Dynasty at the latest, China had indeed established an official historian system.

Du Weiyun praises that in the Shang Dynasty or the Xia Dynasty at the latest, China had established official historians in different governmental organizations, and the establishment of official historians is occupational and professional. However, from the definition of the historian, although the occupational and professional historical officers are historians, occupationization and professionalization are not the most important characteristics of the historian; it is proved from the fact that there were still historians writing about history although the Western world set up the official historian system in a later time. As stated by Western historians: it seemed unlikely that, in the beginning, the duty of the so-called historian has its origins in history. It exactly shows that occupationization is not the characteristic of the historian. Liang Qichao even states in the Research Methods of Chinese History:.……(continue)