返回正常中文阅读
大错 
小错 
不顺 
Friendly Feudalism: The Tibet Myth
I. For Lords and Lamas
Along with the blood drenched landscape of religious conflict there is the experience of inner peace and solace that every religion promises, none more so than Buddhism. Standing in marked contrast to the intolerant savagery of other religions, Buddhism is neither fanatical nor dogmatic--so say its adherents. For many of them Buddhism is less a theology and more a meditative and investigative discipline intended to promote an inner harmony and enlightenment while directing us to a path of right living. Generally, the spiritual focus is not only on oneself but on the welfare of others. One tries to put aside egoistic pursuits and gain a deeper understanding of one’s connection to all people and things. “Socially engaged Buddhism” tries to blend individual liberation with responsible social action in order to build an enlightened society.
A glance at history, however, reveals that not all the many and widely varying forms of Buddhism have been free of doctrinal fanaticism, nor free of the violent and exploitative pursuits so characteristic of other religions. In Sri Lanka there is a legendary and almost sacred recorded history about the triumphant battles waged by Buddhist kings of yore. During the twentieth century, Buddhists clashed violently with each other and with non-Buddhists in Thailand, Burma, Korea, Japan, India, and elsewhere. In Sri Lanka, armed battles between Buddhist Sinhalese and Hindu Tamils have taken many lives on both sides. In 1998 the U.S. State Department listed thirty of the world’s most violent and dangerous extremist groups. Over half of them were religious, specifically Muslim, Jewish, and Buddhist. 1
In South Korea, in 1998, thousands of monks of the Chogye Buddhist order fought each other with fists, rocks, fire-bombs, and clubs, in pitched battles that went on for weeks. They were vying for control of the order, the largest in South Korea, with its annual budget of $9.2 million, its millions of dollars worth of property, and the privilege of appointing 1,700 monks to various offices. The brawls damaged the main Buddhist sanctuaries and left dozens of monks injured, some seriously. The Korean public appeared to disdain both factions, feeling that no matter what side took control, “it would use worshippers’ donations for luxurious houses and expensive cars.” 2
As with any religion, squabbles between or within Buddhist sects are often fueled by the material corruption and personal deficiencies of the leadership. For example, in Nagano, Japan, at Zenkoji, the prestigious complex of temples that has hosted Buddhist sects for more than 1,400 years, “a nasty battle” arose between Komatsu the chief priest and the Tacchu, a group of temples nominally under the chief priest's sway. The Tacchu monks accused Komatsu of selling writings and drawings under the temple's name for his own gain. They also were appalled by the frequency with which he was seen in the company of women. Komatsu in turn sought to isolate and punish monks who were critical of his leadership. The conflict lasted some five years and made it into the courts. 3
But what of Tibetan Buddhism? Is it not an exception to this sort of strife? And what of the society it helped to create? Many Buddhists maintain that, before the Chinese crackdown in 1959, old Tibet was a spiritually oriented kingdom free from the egotistical lifestyles, empty materialism, and corrupting vices that beset modern industrialized society. Western news media, travel books, novels, and Hollywood films have portrayed the Tibetan theocracy as a veritable Shangri-La. The Dalai Lama himself stated that “the pervasive influence of Buddhism” in Tibet, “amid the wide open spaces of an unspoiled environment resulted in a society dedicated to peace and harmony. We enjoyed freedom and contentment.” 4
A reading of Tibet’s history suggests a somewhat different picture. “Religious conflict was commonplace in old Tibet,” writes one western Buddhist practitioner. “History belies the Shangri-La image of Tibetan lamas and their followers living together in mutual tolerance and nonviolent goodwill. Indeed, the situation was quite different. Old Tibet was much more like Europe during the religious wars of the Counterreformation.” 5 In the thirteenth century, Emperor Kublai Khan created the first Grand Lama, who was to preside over all the other lamas as might a pope over his bishops. Several centuries later, the Emperor of China sent an army into Tibet to support the Grand Lama, an ambitious 25-year-old man, who then gave himself the title of Dalai (Ocean) Lama, ruler of all Tibet. Here is a historical irony: the first Dalai Lama was installed by a Chinese army.
His two previous lama “incarnations” were then retroactively recognized as his predecessors, thereby transforming the 1st Dalai Lama into the 3rd Dalai Lama. This 1st (or 3rd) Dalai Lama seized monasteries that did not belong to his sect, and is believed to have destroyed Buddhist writings that conflicted with his claim to divinity. The Dalai Lama who succeeded him pursued a sybaritic life, enjoying many mistresses, partying with friends, and acting in other ways deemed unfitting for an incarnate deity. For these transgressions he was murdered by his priests. Within 170 years, despite their recognized divine status, five Dalai Lamas were killed by their high priests or other courtiers. 6
For hundreds of years competing Tibetan Buddhist sects engaged in bitterly violent clashes and summary executions. In 1660, the 5th Dalai Lama was faced with a rebellion in Tsang province, the stronghold of the rival Kagyu sect with its high lama known as the Karmapa. The 5th Dalai Lama called for harsh retribution against the rebels, directing the Mongol army to obliterate the male and female lines, and the offspring too “like eggs smashed against rocks…. In short, annihilate any traces of them, even their names.” 7
In 1792, many Kagyu monasteries were confiscated and their monks were forcibly converted to the Gelug sect (the Dalai Lama’s denomination). The Gelug school, known also as the “Yellow Hats,” showed little tolerance or willingness to mix their teachings with other Buddhist sects. In the words of one of their traditional prayers: “Praise to you, violent god of the Yellow Hat teachings/who reduces to particles of dust/ great beings, high officials and ordinary people/ who pollute and corrupt the Gelug doctrine.” 8 An eighteenth-century memoir of a Tibetan general depicts sectarian strife among Buddhists that is as brutal and bloody as any religious conflict might be. 9 This grim history remains largely unvisited by present-day followers of Tibetan Buddhism in the West.
慈悲的封建制－－西藏迷思
《慈悲的封建制－－西藏迷思》是译言维基平台上的一个协作项目。有兴趣参与本文协作翻译、校对、完善的朋友请点击这里。欢迎大家传播本文，更欢迎大家传播这个项目。关于西藏问题，当前东西方在认知上的碰撞让人震惊、愤怒，同时也应让人思考。希望通过协作的力量，我们能带来更多相对客观、理性、和值得思考的内容。
目前您正在阅读的这篇，还包括了纳米阿东和丁丁的付出。对本文的翻译有意见、建议，或是想参与未完成部分的翻译，您可以来这里贡献力量。
第一章 领主和喇嘛（1）
宗教冲突有着血腥的历史。而每一种宗教又都向信徒们保证，会为他们带来内心的平和与喜悦。而没有哪种宗教象佛教那样更强调这一点了。佛教徒们说，与其他宗教难以容纳其他意见的野蛮行为相反，佛教不推崇狂热和教条。对于他们当中的很多人来讲，佛教更象一种能带来内心和谐与开悟的冥想和思辨，而不是一种神学意义上的宗教。它带来的是内心的和谐与了悟。它向我们指引通往正确生活的道路。通常，佛教对精神世界的关注不仅局限于个人，同时也关注他人的幸福。佛教徒会试图抛弃对自我利益的追求，而深化自身与其他人和其他事务关联的领悟。“有社会责任感的佛教”试图将个人的自由与负责任的社会行为结合起来，以期建立一个开明的社会。
然而纵观历史，我们发现并非所有的佛教派系和形式都摆脱了教条式的狂热，或是与其他宗教类似的暴力和对他人的剥削。在斯里兰卡的历史中有一段以近乎神圣的方式记录着的传奇，讲述的是上古时期一位佛教国王在战争中的凯旋。在20世纪，佛教徒之间，以及他们和非佛教徒之间的暴力冲突在泰国，缅甸，韩国，日本，印度以及其他地方都发生过。 在斯里兰卡，信仰佛教的僧伽罗人和印地教的泰米尔人之间的武装冲突，让双方都付出了大量生命的代价。1998年，美国国务院列出了30个世界上最暴力和危险的极端组织。其中一半以上是宗教组织，尤其是穆斯林，犹太教和佛教组织。[注1]
1998年在南朝鲜，Chogye（译者注：曹溪宗，韩国最大的佛教派別，为禅宗的分支之一，但近年來充斥派系争斗）教派的几千名僧侣用拳头，石块，燃烧弹和棍棒相互斗殴达数星期。他们争夺的焦点是对韩国最大佛教团体的控制权，以及相关的每年920万美金的预算，数以百万美元计的资产，和向各个基层组织指派1700名僧侣的权利。这场争斗破坏了主要的佛教圣地，造成数十名僧人受伤，其中有些伤势严重。韩国民众的反应似乎是对两派都鄙视，不管那边最终掌权，“他们都会把信徒的善款豪宅名车上。”[注2]
和其他宗教信仰类似，物质方面的腐败和某些领袖个人行为不端往往给佛教各教派内或之间的争端火上浇油。比如日本长野的善光寺，是一个有1400年历史，有很高声望的寺庙群。在主持（Komatsu）和主持统治下的一系列寺庙（Tacchu）之间发生了一场“恶毒的争斗”。Tacchu的僧侣们指控Komatsu以寺院的名义销售书画作品中饱私囊。他们还为主持频频有女人陪伴而震惊。而Komatsu则对批评他的僧侣施以惩罚。这场长达五年的纠纷最终闹上法庭。[注3]
藏传佛教的情况如何呢？它是否能免疫于这样的争端呢？它所帮助建设的社会又如何呢？很多佛教徒坚持认为在1959年中国进行弹压之前，西藏是一片精神世界的净土－－完全不受现代工业社会以自我为中心的生活方式、空虚的物欲和腐败等问题的困扰。西方新闻媒体、旅游书籍、小说和好莱坞电影把神权统治下西藏描绘成一个真实世界中的香格里拉。达赖喇嘛本人也称，在西藏，“佛教的影响广泛而深远；广袤的处女地孕育了一个和平、和谐的社会。我们享受自由和自足。”[注4]
然而对西藏历史的解读却展示给我们一个不尽相同的景象。“在旧西藏，宗教冲突是家常便饭。”一位西方的佛教徒这样写到。“历史为藏教喇嘛及其追随者们生活在忍让、非暴力、友善的香格里拉这一图景蒙上了阴影。实际的情况大相径庭。旧日的西藏更像欧洲宗教战争的反改革（Counter-Reformation）时期 [注5]。”在十三世纪，忽必烈树立了第一位“大喇嘛（Grand Lama）”,其凌驾于其他喇嘛之上的地位就象教皇与他的主教们之间的关系。几个世纪后，中国的君主派遣军队入藏支持当时25岁、雄心勃勃的“大喇嘛”。这位年轻的喇嘛后自封为达赖喇嘛（意为海洋）和全藏的统治者。具有讽刺意味的史实是：第一位达赖喇嘛是中国军队树立的。
他之前的两位“转世”喇嘛也被追认为达赖，因此真正的第一任达赖喇嘛史称达赖三世。这位实际上的一世（三世）达赖喇嘛没收了其他不属于他所在教派的寺院，并被认为曾销毁与他所崇尚的教义不相符的佛学文档。下一世达赖喇嘛则过着奢侈享乐的生活。他有很多情妇，与朋友们纵情享乐，以及其他与转世活佛的身份不相符的事。由于这些不端的行为，他被属下的僧侣谋杀。在170年间，尽管达赖喇嘛有着至高无上的神圣地位，他们当中的五位死于治下的高级僧侣或其他朝臣之手。[注6]
几百年间，西藏的各个竞争教派之间充斥着严酷的暴力冲突和草率的杀戮。1660年，五世达赖喇嘛面临后藏地区的强敌白教嘎举（Kagyu）教派最高喇嘛葛玛巴挑起的叛乱。五世达赖用严酷的手段对付叛乱者。他指示蒙古军队消灭所有男女，以及他们的后代。“如同以卵击石。。。总之，消灭他们的一切痕迹，甚至名字。”[注7]
1792年，很多嘎举寺院被没收，僧侣被迫归依为黄教格鲁派（达赖喇嘛的教派）。格鲁派，又称“黄顶”，并未表现出多少容忍和融合其他教派的意愿。如同黄教的传统颂词中所述“赞美你，黄教的暴力之神/把他们变为尘土/那些玷污和腐蚀格鲁教义的/大人物、高官、和凡人。[注8]（译者：译自如下英语Praise to you, violent god of the Yellow Hat teachings/who reduces to particles of dust/ great beings, high officials and ordinary people/ who pollute and corrupt the Gelug doctrine.）”一位十八世纪西藏将军的回忆录中描述藏传教派冲突的残忍和血腥与任何其他宗教所经历的别无二致。[注9]这段冷酷的史实往往被当今西方藏传佛教的追随者们所忽略。
