安德烈亚斯穆勒(你将插翅难飞安德烈亚斯•穆勒Andr)

【编者按】在本篇对话中，安德烈亚斯回应了一些人对于他所传达的这个“简单而纯粹”的信息的批评和质疑。也谨以此回应近期某些人对本所刊发的“龙梅非二元对话”的非议。欢迎大家在下方留言区交流！

Critici ***

批 评

Q: Andreas, you're often regarded as part of the Neo-Advaita scene which softens up the ancient and traditional teachings. You're accused of presenting some “enlightenment light" message and offering instant enlightenment. What do you think about that?

问：安德烈亚斯，你经常被视为弱化了古老传统教法的“新非二元”圈子里的一份子。而且你被诟病传达了一些“轻松开悟”的信息以及提供“快速开悟”（指南）。对此你怎么看？

A: Not much actually. However, when you look a bit closer, you see that these people usually haven't really heard or were not really interested in what's being said here. Often, it's said that I claim “everyone is enlightened” and “you don't have to do anything in order to become enlightened”. Yet, that isn't really what's being said here. What I say is that there is no one separate and no one to be enlightened or unenlightened. Of course, in that sense, there is no one who has to do something at all. Yet, doing may apparently happen -or not.

答：其实没什么看法。不过，当你仔细看（那些人）的时候，你会发现他们通常并没有真的听到我们在这里所说的，或是对此并不真正感兴趣。我经常被说成是宣称“每个人都是开悟的”、“为了开悟你大可不必做任何事”。然而那并不是我们在这里所说的。我所说的是，没有一个分离的人，（因而）没有一个开悟或不开悟的个体。在这层意义上，当然根本就没有人必须要做点什么。然而，“做事”或许看上去会发生——或者不会。

Q: They say that you make it too easy and that people like that simple stuff.

问：他们说你把事情搞得太容易了，人们喜欢简单的东西【译者注：言外之意Andreas迎合了人们的需求】。

A: I don't say that it's easy. For the seeker, it's not easy at all. Seen by the seeker, it's impossible. The seeker will never get it. The seeker will never be free. Insofar, this message is quite heavy for the seeker. The ease is that what we speak about is already the case. 'What is' is naturally whole by simply being itself. 'What is' is absolutely at ease being what it is. There is no effort anywhere.

答：我没说它是容易的。对于追寻者来说，那可一点儿都不容易。在追寻者看来，那是不可能的，他们永远不会得到它。追寻者永远不会自由。就此而言，这个信息对于求道者来说是非常沉重的。说它容易，是因为我们所谈论的已然如是。因“如是”简单呈现为其自身，自然而然是完整无缺的。“如是”如其所是，绝对自在，没有需要努力的地方。

Q: But the seeker thinks that they have to do effort.

问：可是追寻者认为他们需要努力。

A: Yes, exactly. That's how the seeker lives. They discard the simplicity of 'what is' and live in the illusion that they have to arrive there. They overhear the simplicity of the message and turn it into something very difficult and complicated. Another interesting thing is that this message has been around in the so-called ancient times as well.

答：是的，正是如此。追寻者正是靠这个（努力）活着。他们对“如是”的单纯置之不理，活在必须到彼岸的幻象中。他们无意中听到这个信息如此之简单，却将之演绎成无比困难、极其复杂的东西。另一件有趣的事是，这个信息在所谓的古代也一直反复流传。

Q: Really?

问：真的吗？

A: Oh, yes, you can find it here and there. It's much rarer than all this spiritual stuff, however, it's there. And what these people talk about usually is the personal interpretation of this simple and pure message. That's the thing with any religion: The actual message degenerates into a footnote and becomes suffocated by the rituals, practices and traditions of the person. For the seeker, the path is much more important than the goal because being on a path reflects its experience. Therefore, the seeker has to discard a message that denies its existence and the need to practice.

答：哦，是的，你到处都能找到它。它比那些灵性的东西要稀罕得多，可是它就在那里。这些人（追寻者）所谈论的往往是他们对这个简单而纯粹的信息的个人解读。这正是在所有宗教里所发生的事：真正的信息被边缘化为脚注，湮没在个人化的仪式、修行和传统中。对于追寻者来说，路径远比目标更为重要，因为在路上才能映衬出个体的体验。因此，追寻者只好对这样一个信息置若罔闻，因它否定了他自身的存在和修行的必要性。

Q: Another critici *** is that you don't meet people from where they are. Is this message for everyone? Can it even be dangerous?

问：另一种（对你的）批评说你从不“因材施教”。这个（非二元）信息对于每个人都适用吗？它会不会甚至有些危险？

A: Well, theoretically it's for everyone. It doesn't say that you need any specific requirements. You don't have to have certain knowledge to face that. However, practically, it's only for those who are interested in it. And according to my experience, there are only a few people interested in that message. If you look at the numbers of people that are interested in that issue - compared to the numbers of people who are drawn to spiritual offers, for example -, you will see that they aren't many. There maybe some who are around that message for a while, but the ones who aren't really ready - and I don't mean “ready” in a negative way or in terms of there being a path - lose interest very soon. They simply don't get what they are looking for. Their apparent needs just aren't recognized by me. They don't get the attention they long for. They don't get the entertainment they look for. They don't get highs of spiritual uplifting and so on. So, they go away after a while.

答：呃，理论上来说，它是对每个人说的。它并没有说你需要具备任何特定的必要条件，也不需要具有特定的知识来面对它。然而，实际上它只是对那些对它感兴趣的人（而说的）。根据我的经验，只有一小部分人会对这个信息感兴趣。如果你看一看对这个话题感兴趣的人数，再对比一下被诸如灵性教导所吸引的人数，你会发现前者真的不多。也许有一些人会在这个信息上逗留一阵子，可是那些没有真正准备好的人（当我说没有“准备好”时，并没有否定的意思或意味着有一条路径）很快就会对此失去兴趣。只是因为没有获得他们所寻觅的，他们看上去的需求没有在我这里得到认可，也没有得到他们所渴望受到的关注。在这里，他们既找不到快乐，也无法获得灵性提升的高峰体验，等等。所以他们很快就会离开。

Q: What about it being dangerous?

问：那说它危险又怎么讲呢？

A: Well, there as well, I don't see a real danger. Of course, this message can have a huge impact on people's apparent lives. And, of course, there are lots of misunderstandings around this message. However, in the long run, I don't know anyone who was more disturbed than they were before. Or anyone who robbed a bank because they mistook the message for something like “nothing matters”. I mean, the whole “destruction” thing (which, potentially, sounds dangerous) refers to an illusion. What's also being pointed to -apparently - is wholeness itself. In a story-like sense, this is pointing to a healing that's already the case, which may sound very positive. Anyway, this message is totally neutral, so to say.

答：怎么说呢，同样的，我没有看到真正的危险。当然，这个信息可以对人们看上去的生活造成巨大的冲击，而且围绕这个信息也产生了许多的误解。然而，从长远来看，我不晓得哪个人（因为这个信息而）比以前更烦恼，或者说有哪个人因为将这个信息与“做什么都无所谓”相混淆而去抢银行了。我的意思是，这整个信息的“破坏性”（可能这听起来有些危险）指向的是一个幻象。不过看上去呢，它也同时指向了圆满本身。从故事叙事的角度来说，这指向了一种已然完成的疗愈，这听起来就非常积极了。总之，这个信息可以说是完全中立的。

Q: There are people who say that you can't say this to people who aren't prepared.

问：有人说你不可以对那些还没有准备好的人宣说这个信息。

A: Well, that's what I mean. My impression is that these people are simply not attracted to that message. There may be exceptions, yet, I actually don't see that happening.

答：嗯，正合我意。我的印象是，这些人只是没有和这个信息产生共鸣罢了。也许有例外，不过我还没看到过。

Q: Some people also accuse you of giving a spiritual by-pass.

问：有些人也会指责你给出了一条“灵性逃避”的路。

A: Yes, I know. I understand their impression, and I understand that they see it like that. However, my impression is that they never really followed what I say. Usually, that comes from their attempt to use this message as a spiritual by-pass and their experience that this doesn't work.

答：是的，我知道。我理解他们的这种印象，我也理解他们这么看（的原因）。然而，我的印象是他们从来都没有真正明白我在说什么。通常产生那种印象是由于他们试图将这个信息用作“灵性逃避”，然而他们的体验却告诉他们：那并不奏效。

Q: Don t you say that there is nothing to seek?

问：你不是说没有什么可追寻的吗？

A: Yes, of course, I do. But I don't say this to a person. I'm not trying to convince the person in order to create a better experience. But yes, of course, there is nothing to seek and nothing to find. Even all the so much honored people like Ramana Maharshi or Jesus point to this utter simplicity. I have no idea why this can be overheard so often. Well, me too, I overheard it (laughs). Most critici *** that comes to my ears rather refers to what people think that I'm saying than to what's actually being said. And usually, I can "proof" that instantly. In a sense, this message is much closer to the ancient scriptures than many of these people criticizing me, respectively that message think. Yet, it's not coming from a learned knowledge. You know, often there is a lot of double standard going on: If Ramana never read any scriptures- or rather read the scriptures only years after his apparent awakening -that's okay. If Andreas Müller from Germany never did that, he must be a fraud because he hasn't read the scriptures. Not that I want to compare myself with Ramana. I have never met him and would not dare to speak up in his name. I mean, there are so many people out there claiming to be in Ramana's lineage who have neither met him nor were able to ask him if it's okay that they speak “in his name”. Ignorant, that's what I think it is.

答：我当然这么说过，不过我不是对个体说的。我并没有试图说服个体去创造更好的体验。可是没错，当然没什么好追寻的，也没什么可以被发现。其实所有备受尊崇的人（比如拉玛纳·马哈希或者耶稣）都指向了这个彻底简单质朴的信息。我不知道为什么它经常会碰巧被人听到，嗯，我也是碰巧听到的（众笑）。大多数传到我耳朵里的批评，与其说批评的是我所讲，倒不如说是他们认为我所说的。通常我都能立刻证明这一点。从某种意义上讲，相比于很多批评者所想的，这个信息更接近古老经文的原旨。只不过它不是一种学来的知识。（在这个问题上），经常会有一些双重标准：如果说拉玛纳从来没有读过任何经文，甚或说他只是在他看上去的觉醒数年之后才读过一些经文，那是没问题的。可如果来自德国的安德烈亚斯·穆勒从来没读过经文，那么他一定是个骗子。我并不是想把我自己同拉玛纳作比较，我从未见过他，也不敢以他之名发声。我想说的是，有那么多宣称自己是拉玛纳徒子徒孙的人，他们既没有见过拉玛纳本尊，也没机会问问他老人家“以他之名”发声是否恰当。我觉得这有点儿无礼。

Q: You don't see yourself in Ramana's lineage?

问：你不认为自己跟拉玛纳同属一个传承？

A: Of course, I don't. As I said, I have never met him. I don't know what he was saying. Yes, there are these books – and there seem to be correlations, but, God, who the *** knows!? Who of those self-appointed gurus have ever met him? And, by the way, look at what they say, what they "pass on": the most superficial of the superficial of Ramana's words. They turn it into their psychological and spiritual games. If you take him for real, that probably was not what he said.

答：当然不会。如我所说，我从未见过他，也不知道他说了些什么。是的，他有一些书出版，跟我所说的似乎有些相关。可是老天！谁特么知道呢？！那些自封的古鲁（灵性导师）谁又见过他呢？另外，你看他们所说的，所“传承”的：都是对拉玛纳话语最最肤浅的解读。并将之弄成他们的精神和灵性游戏。如果你认真去看，那很有可能不是拉玛纳所说的。

Q: And how is he for you?

问：那拉玛纳对于你来说（意味着什么）呢？

A: As I said, I don't know much about him.I don't care much about him. Not because I think anything specific about him.He is just not around and therefore can't play a big part in my life. I don'tclaim anything. I just say what I say, or rather: There are the words leavingmy mouth that are leaving my mouth - and then we can discuss that.

答：我已经说过，我对他并不太了解。我也不是特别在意他。并不是因为我对他有什么特殊的看法，只是因为他已作古，因此也无法在我生命中占据重要的份量。我没有断言任何事，我只是自说自话，确切地说：话语从我口中流出，然后我们可以讨论它。

Q: What about Tony Parsons?

问：那托尼·帕森斯呢？

A: Well, in the story, he told me that there is no one. However, why I heard it, I don't know. He is telling it to a lot of people (laughs).

答：呃，在故事里，他告诉我“没有人（个体）”。可是为什么我听到了这句话，我不知道。他跟很多人都说这话（众笑）。

Q: Do you refer to him in a kind of a lineage?

问：你把他当作某种传承吗？

A: No, not really. It may look like that, and maybe it's like that, however, to speak of a lineage would absolutely contradict the whole message. Insofar, there is no experience of being a guru on his side, and there is no experience of having gotten anything, having reached anywhere or passing on anything on my side. You know, within the story, Tony was the one who told me, however, this whole thing is utterly impersonal. As I said, why I faded out and not so many others apparently, I don't know. And, you see, speaking like this already sounds as if something had happened at all. Again, we are missing the point. In the end, it had nothing to do with Tony, and it had nothing to do with me.

答：未见得。有可能看上去象，也可能就是那样，可是说到传承就会跟这整个的信息格格不入。迄今为止，作为他，并没有身为一个上师的体验；作为我，也没有得到任何或到达某处，或传承任何（教导）的体验。故事中，托尼是告诉我（这个信息）的那个人，然而这整个信息是彻底非个人化的。如我所说，为什么看上去我“消失”了，而其他很多人却没有，我不知道。你看，这么说起来好像有些事确实发生了——又搞错了。总之，这跟托尼、跟我都没什么关系。

Q: So, does your message follow a tradition?

问：那么你（所传达）的信息有没有遵循某个传统？

A: No, it doesn't. It comes from an utter directness. It seems as if you can find this message throughout history over and over again, yet, it never was coming from a tradition. The apparent person would love to squeeze it into a tradition with a path and special knowledge - and, above all, with something that you can and have to do. But what all these messages are trying to say is that there is no 'I' and nothing to get. This message can't be embedded into a system of beliefs, paths and hierarchy. In that sense, it speaks out directly what it means and therefore stands absolutely for itself. In the story, one could say: "Take it or leave it!" It doesn't leave any room for discussions – not because it claims to be right but because there isn't really anything to discuss. You know, that's the difference between a teaching and this direct communication: Within a teaching, the emphasis is on the path and of somehow “doing the right thing”. The whole emphasis is on what you have to do in order to proceed on your path. In a teaching, there is hardly any emphasis on finally arriving there. But all the people that I would refer to as communicating this message state that there is no 'I', that there is nothing wrong and nothing to get. The apparent me simply doesn't want to hear this, therefore, it has to fight it. I know, just because some Indian guys said that a few decades or a few hundred years ago, it's easy to put them on a throne and assume that they were talking about a religion. Yet, they all stated that they were talking about something very natural and ordinary. Wholeness is that natural reality, which is nothing else than what seems to go on. There is nothing else. It's simple and plain and obvious.

答：没有。它是再直接不过的。看来你似乎可以在历史长河中一再发现这个信息，但它从不是来自某个传统。看似存在的个体喜欢将之纳入某个传统：有路径、有特殊的认识——最要紧的是，你能够且必须有所努力。而这个信息试图传达的是：没有“我”，也没有什么可以获得。这个信息无法被纳入一个信仰系统，也无法被归为一条路径或等级体系。在这个意义上来说，它直指本意，因此绝对是其言自立。在故事里，人们可以说“或取之，或舍之！”没有留下任何讨论的空间——不是因为它宣称自己是正确的，而是因为着实无可讨论。这就是（灵性）教导和这种直接交流的区别：在教导中，重点是路径和以某种方式“做正确的事情”。整个重心落在你该如何努力使自己能在此路上继续前行，基本没有关注最终的到达。而那些我认为在交流这个信息的讲者们，都指出没有“我”，没有什么是错误的，也没有什么可以得到。看似存在的“我”只是不想听到这个，因此它必须与之抗争。据我所知，只是因为一些印度人几十年前或几百年前说到过这个信息，便很容易将他们推上神坛并认为他们是在谈论某个宗教。然而，他们都称其所言者皆非常自然而普通。圆满是一种自然的现实，它只不过是看上去的发生而已。没有别的了，就是如此简单明了、直截了当。

Q: But I can't see it.

问：可是我无法看到它。

A: Yes, simply because there is nothing to see. Look, Ramana might have said: “Just give up the seeking.” Exactly that's what liberation is: the end of seeking without finding anything. Yet, what's left is naturally whole. What's left is exactly this, yet, without the seeking for something else. That's it. Nothing has been found. Nothing has been additionally seen. It's just the end of the seeker.

答：是的，那只是因为没什么好看到的。拉玛纳或许会说：“放弃追寻即可。”那正是解脱的含义：追寻的尽头一无所获。然而，唯有自然的完整，恰恰就是这，不需要寻找别的什么。什么都没找到，也没有什么额外的发现。这只是追寻者的终结。

Q: Hmm. How can the seeker end itself?

问：嗯…追寻者如何终结其自身呢？

A: The seeker can't end itself, because there isn't even a seeker. The seeker doesn't exist.

答：追寻者无法自我终结，因为根本就没有一个追寻者，追寻者压根儿就不存在。

Q: How can I make this become obvious?

问：我如何才能让这一切变得清晰明了？

A: You can't. I can't. Nobody can.Everybody is just helpless here. There is no way out and no way in. There is nopath, because everything is already the goal.

答：你做不到，我也不行，没有人能做到，这里的每个人都很无助。没有出路，也没有入口。没有一条路径，因为一切都已是目标（本身）了。

安德烈亚斯个人主页：

阅读本书更多内容：

Useless 无用

True self 真我

Well-being 幸福

All is love 一切都是爱

Unio mystica 神秘合一

The ultimate goal 终极目标

Additional realizition 额外的领悟

Advantage-disadvantage 利益-弊端

What's the 'me'? “我”是什么？

Unwanted “我”不想要

No seeing 没有看见

Innocence 本真

Confused 困惑

What？什么？

Preface 前言

严 正 声 明

本将独家翻译本书全部内容并连载

任何个人或团体欲转载请与版主取得联系

违 者 必 究

“ 赏银几文，沽取浊酒二两 ”