Chapter 3 Dialogue deals for lodging

In some Japanese Zen monasteries, there is an old tradition: a wandering monk debates with a local monk about Buddhism. If he wins, he can stay overnight. Had to continue wandering. In northern Japan, there are two brothers who are in charge of such a temple.The elder brother is very learned, but the younger brother is stupid and has only one eye. One night, a wandering monk came to ask for lodging. The elder brother had studied for a long time and felt very tired, so he ordered his younger brother to go to the debate. The older brother said, "Converse in silence." After a little while, the tramp came to the brother and said, "Your brother is a very good fellow, and he won the debate very cleverly, so I'm going, good night."

"Before you go," said the brother, "please tell me about this conversation." "Well," said the wanderer, "first I hold out one finger to represent Buddha, then your brother holds out two fingers to represent Buddha and his teachings; for this I hold out three fingers to represent Buddha, his Teach and his disciples, and then your wise brother waved his clenched fist in front of me to show that those three came from the realization of one whole." Then the Wanderer left. After a while, the younger brother ran in with a painful look. "I know you won that debate," said the brother.

"Nothing to win," said the younger brother, "that tramp is a very rude man." "Oh?" said my brother, "tell me the subject of that debate." "Hi," said my brother, "when he saw me, he insulted me by holding out one finger for having only one eye, but since he was a newcomer, I thought it would be better to be polite, so I held up two fingers , to congratulate him on having two eyes. At this point the impertinent wretch held up three fingers to signify that there were only three eyes between us, so I went mad and punched him on the nose threateningly—so he's gone."

Brother laughed. All debate is useless and stupid.Debate is stupid because no one gets to the truth through discussion, through debate, you might get a night's lodging, but that's it. Tradition is beautiful, for many centuries, in any Zen temple in Japan, if you ask to stay in a Zen temple, you have to debate, and if you win the debate, you can stay for the night - this is a kind of symbol - But just for one night, in the morning you have to leave.This formulation through debate, logic, reasoning, you never get anywhere but a night's stay.Don't you deceive yourself, the so-called overnight stay is the purpose, you have to wander, you have to start walking again in the morning.

But many people always deceive themselves, thinking that they can achieve their goals by logic anyway.The night's lodging had become the ultimate goal, they never left, and many mornings passed.Logic can draw hypothetical conclusions, but never to truth, logic can lead something closer to truth, but never to truth. Remember that something close to the truth is also a lie, because what does it mean?Either it's true or it's not, there's nothing in between.Either it's true or it's not true, you can't say it's a half truth, nothing is like that - just like there can't be a half circle, because that "circle" means the whole, and a half circle doesn't does not exist.If it's a half, then it's not a circle.

There is no half truth, truth is whole, you cannot grasp it piecemeal, you cannot grasp it in parts: an approximation of truth is a deception, but logic can only lead to this deception.You may have a lodging at night, just to sleep and relax, but that doesn't make the lodging your home, and in the morning you have to wander again, the journey doesn't end there, every morning it starts again and again .Relax through logic, through reasoning, but it cannot remain, it cannot become static -- always remember, you have to wander. Tradition is beautiful, so we must first understand tradition and its meaning: it is a symbol.Second: all discussion is stupid, because, by the atmosphere of discussion, you can never understand another person, and whatever he says is a misunderstanding.The mind is focused on winning, conquering, it is impossible to know, it is impossible, because knowing requires a mind that is not violent. When you are focusing on how to win, you are violent.

Debate is a kind of violence, you can kill through debate, you cannot regenerate through debate, you cannot give life through debate, you can murder through debate, truths can be murdered through debate, but they cannot be resurrected.This is violence, and this gesture is violence.You are not really seeking truth, you are seeking victory.When victory is the end, truth will sacrifice; when truth is the end, you may sacrifice victory. And truth should be the goal, not victory, because when victory is the goal, you're a politician, not a religious person, you're attacking, you're trying to outwit others, you're trying to control others, Be the ruler, and truth can never be a dictatorship, it can never destroy others.

Truth can never mean that your victory over others is a victory: Truth comes with humility, humility, it is not an illusion of ego - but all debate is an illusion of ego, so debate can never lead to truth, It always leads to the untrue, the untruth, because the pursuit of victory is inherently a stupid phenomenon, the truth wins, not "you", not "I".In an argument either you win or I win, truth never wins. The true seeker will let the truth win.The debater is precisely demanding that victory should be mine and it should not belong to anyone else.In truth there is no one else, in truth we meet and become one, so who can be the winner and who can be the loser?In truth, no one is defeated; in truth, truth wins and we all lose.But in a debate, I'm me, you're you, and in fact, there's no bridge.

How can you understand someone when you are against him?Understanding is impossible, understanding requires sympathy, understanding requires participation, understanding means listening fully to another, only then will understanding blossom.But if you are in a discussion, arguing, arguing, reasoning, you are not listening, you are just pretending that you are listening, deep down you are preparing, deep down you have come to the next step : When someone stops, you have to say something, you are already preparing how to refute him, you have stopped listening to him, but are trying to refute him!

In fact, in discussion, in debate, truth is not important, so debate is never a communication, it is impossible to share through debate, you can argue, the more you argue... the more one-sided you are, the more you argue, the gap The bigger it is, the more it becomes an abyss, and that can't be a meeting place.That's why philosophers never come together, learned people never come together: they are great debaters, there is an abyss, they cannot come together with others, impossible. Only lovers can get together, but lovers don't argue, they can communicate.That's why Shraddha - trust, confidence - is so emphasized in the East.If you are arguing with your guru, there is a big gap, it is better to leave, let this guru be your night's lodging, just walk away.There's no way out with him, and that gap will widen.If you are argumentative, that gap cannot become a bridge either, no way.Trust means sympathy, trust means you are not arguing, you are here to listen, not to argue, you have come to understand, not to argue, you are not trying to win, on the contrary, you are preparing to lose.

A true disciple is always seeking to be defeated by the master, when he is completely destroyed, completely defeated, that is the greatest moment in the life of the disciple, not the master wants to win, but he is ready to be defeated, the disciple is ready to be defeated .And when the disciple is no longer there, when the disciple is totally defeated, disappears, only then the gap is a bridge, the abyss disappears, and the master can penetrate you. So, this happened: Jesus roamed all his countries, but all the disciples he could gather were simple people, not one educated, not one scholar.Not that there were no scholars there, at that time there were great scholars and the Jews were at the pinnacle of their glory, that's why they produced such a sun-like Jesus.Jesus is the pinnacle, and Jesus being able to be born means that the Jews have reached their pinnacle, and they have never reached such a pinnacle again.Great scholars were there, great debates were arranged.The synagogue is a place of learning, a real university, and people come from all parts of the country to discuss, to argue, to argue, to seek; but it is a debate, and no scholar follows Jesus. In fact, all scholars agree that this man should be eliminated, and all scholars, learned people are ready to kill this man!Why?Because this man is against debate, he's taking away their foundations, the whole structure is going to collapse, this man is arguing against reason, he's talking about trust, he's talking about love, he's talking about how to be between two hearts Create a bridge between them. Debate is between two minds, between two heads; love, communication, and trust are between two hearts. He has started a new voyage——friendship, discipleship, and growth; he is completely Different levels of thought, different qualities, he's saying, "Put your scriptures aside! You don't need your bibles, because they're just words." Scholars, learned people can't stand that, Jesus Was crucified and executed. He could find only simple people: fishermen, lumberjacks, shoemakers—simple people, all of his disciples were uneducated except Judas, who was really cultured and elegant gentleman, and he paid for thirty Ruby betrayed Jesus, this cultured, elegant Judas betrayed.And Jesus knew this, and if anyone betrayed him, it would be Judas.Why?Because the heart can only be betrayed by the head, love can only be betrayed by logic, and there is nothing else to betray. So before you go into this story, remember the second thing: by logic, by head, by argument, you become alien, alien to other people, and the bridge in it disappears.How can you reach the truth when you cannot understand the other person, when you cannot even listen to him, when your mind is constantly arguing, struggling inside?You are explosive and aggressive, and this kind of offense will not help. All arguments are futile, they never lead anywhere, and even if you feel that the conclusion has been reached, the conclusion is forced.It is not arrived at by discussion.You can silence others, but they are never convinced: never!If you use some logical tricks, you can silence someone, he may not be able to answer you, you know more than he knows, you know more tricks than he knows, you can use words and reasoning to make him Backed into a corner, he couldn't answer.But that's not the way to convince him, he knows deep down: "One day in the future, I'll find more tricks to get you back to where you were. Now I can't answer, well, I accept defeat." He was beaten, but it wasn't a win. These are two different things: when you win a heart, he is not defeated - he is happy, he is feeling victory in your victory, he is sharing, it is not your victory - it is Truth wins, and you both will celebrate.But when you beat someone, he has never won, he continues to be the enemy, and deep down he continues to wait for the moment when he can assert himself. Debate does not become a kind of conviction. If conviction cannot be achieved, where is the conclusion?The conclusion is forced, it is always premature, it is like a miscarriage, it is not a natural birth, you are already forcing - a dead child is born or a crippled child is born who will remain crippled throughout life, Weak and dead. Socrates used to say: "I am a midwife, I help people to be born naturally." A master is a midwife who does not force, because a forced birth cannot be a real birth, it is more like death than seldom like life. So a master is never good at arguing, if he sometimes appears to be arguing, then he is just playing a game with you - playing some kind of reasoning game, don't be a deceiver, he is using a reason to argue with you you play.He is argumentative just to find out if your argumentativeness will be sparked.If it's triggered, you've missed it.If you can listen to his argument without becoming argumentative, he won't play this game with you again.He has to look inside you, you may be consciously listening, unconsciously argumentative, then he has to bring out your unconscious so you can become aware of it. Sometimes it looks like a master is aggressive, he wants to beat you, but he never wants to beat you -- just your ego, not you; just destroy your ego, not you.Remember: the ego is poison and it is destroying you; once the poison is destroyed, you will be free and alive for the first time, you will feel sunshine for the first time.He destroys disease, not you. Sometimes he can be argumentative.There used to be some gurus who were very argumentative, it was impossible to beat them, it was impossible to play this kind of word game with them, but they just helped your consciousness rise so that you know whether the trust in you is real or not. This has happened: a Sufi Junnaid lives with his master, and the master is so argumentative that whatever you say he will immediately deny.If you say, "It's day," he will say, "It's night."— And that's not true, it's daytime. No matter what Jonathan said, he always found the master objecting, and he just bowed his head and said, "Yes, master, it's night." One day the Master said: "Jonnaide, you have won, I cannot create a good argument in you, and I am so obviously a fake, that no one can say indisputably: Stupid! It's daytime , there is no need to argue, it is so obvious. And you still say: Yes, master, it is night. Your trust is deep. Now I will not argue with you, now I can speak the truth, because you are ready All right." Beware of saying "Yes!" with all your heart, then you are ready to listen, and only then can the truth be revealed to you, even if there is even a trace of "no" left in you, then, for you, the truth cannot be revealed, because that "no" will destroy everything.That "no", no matter how small, is powerful, very powerful.Even then the truth is spoken, but, to you, the truth is not revealed, and the "no" will hide it again. That's why I say all debates are futile, that's why I go on repeating again and again that the whole effort of philosophy is futile, it doesn't come to any conclusions -- it can't. I'm going to tell you a story, and then I'm going to get into this Zen story. It happened once: a great minister of a very great emperor died, this minister was very rare, very clever, almost wise, very cunning and shrewd, a brilliant diplomat, and a replacement was sought It is very difficult. The whole kingdom is looking for it, and all the ministers are sent to look for it. At least three people are needed to find it, and finally one of them is selected. After months of searching, the whole kingdom was searched, every hiding place, every corner was searched, and three men were found.One is a great scientist, a great mathematician, who can solve all mathematical problems.Mathematics is really the only certain science - all sciences are branches of it - so he is at the root. The other is a great philosopher, a great system maker: he can create something out of nothing, and just from words, he can create such a beautiful system - it is a miracle that only philosophers can do it.Their hands are empty, they are the greatest magicians, they can create gods, they create theories of creation, they can create everything, and their hands are empty, but they are clever word workers, so they put The words fit together to give you a sense of substance - and nothing! The third person is a religious person, a person who trusts, prays, gives.Those who found these three people must be very smart, because they found three aspects. These three persons represent the three levels of consciousness, and these are the only possible ones: a scientific man, a philosophical man and a religious man - these are the foundations.A scientific man is concerned with experiment: it cannot be proven unless it is proved by experiment, he is empirical, experimental, his truth is the truth of experiment. A man of philosophy is a man of logic, not a man of experiments, experiments are not the subject, as long as by logic he can prove or not prove, he is a simple man, more simple than a scientist, because a scientist must do experiments, so There must be a laboratory.A philosophical man does not work in a laboratory - only in his head, with logic, with mathematics, his whole experiment is in his head, he just proves or fails to prove by logical argument, he can solve Any mystery, or he could make any kind of mystery. And the third person is a person on the religious level. This person does not regard life as a problem. For a religious person, life is not a problem. Don't solve it, just live it. Religious people are experiencers, scientists are experimenters, and philosophers are thinkers.The religious man is an experiencer, he sees life as something to be lived, and if there is any answer, it is obtained through experience, through living.It cannot be decided by logic in advance, because life is greater than logic, and logic is just a wave in the vast ocean of life, so it cannot explain everything.Only when you are detached is it possible to experiment, only on objects. Life is not an object, it is the core of the subject.When you experiment, you are different; when you live, you are whole.So religious people say, "Unless you are one with life, you will never know it." How can you know it from outside?You may know about, about, periphery and periphery, but you never get the hang of it.Therefore, experiment and thought cannot know it except by experience.A simple, trusting person. They searched, found the three men, and sent them to the capital to participate in the final selection.The king said: "You have three days to rest and prepare. On the fourth day you will have an exam in the morning. In the final exam, one of you will be chosen and he will be my minister - he will prove to be the wisest people." They started working in their own ways.Three days is not enough!Scientists have to come up with a lot of experiments and practices - who knows what kind of exams there will be?So, for three days he cannot sleep, there is no time: once he is chosen, he can sleep all his life, so why bother with sleep?He will not sleep or eat - there will not be enough time and there will be a lot to do before the test. Philosophers start thinking, many problems to solve: "Who knows what kind of problems there will be?" Only the religious man is comfortable, he eats, and he eats well, only the religious man can eat well, because eating It's a sign, it's a sacred thing.He sleeps well, he prays, sits outside, walks, looks at the tree, and thanks God, because for a religious man there is no future, no final exam, every moment is an exam, so how can you it prepared?If it is in the future, you can prepare for it; if it is now, here, how can you prepare?You have to face it, and there is no future. Sometimes the scientist says, "What are you doing? Waste of time - eat, sleep, pray. Later you can do your prayers." But he smiled and didn't argue, he was not an argumentative person. A philosopher would say, "You've been sleeping, you've been sitting out in the garden, you've been looking at the trees, it's not going to help, exams are not child's play, you have to be ready." But he smiles, and he compares Believe in logic more believe in laughter. On the morning of the fourth day, when they were going to the palace for their final exams, the scientist could hardly walk. He was so tired from doing his experiments that it seemed that his whole life was gone. Falling asleep, he was so sleepy and confused that he was going crazy! What about the philosopher?He wasn't as tired, but he was more uncertain than ever.Because he thinks and thinks and debates and argues, and fails to come to the conclusion of the debate, he's confused, messed up, he's become a mess.He could answer many things the day he came, but now, he can't.Even his certain answers became uncertain.The more you think about it, the less useful philosophy becomes.Only a fool would believe in certainty, the more you think, the wiser you become, you can see... it's all words, no substance.Many times, he wanted to back off because it was useless and his conditions were not met.But the scientist said, "Come on! Let's try! What have we got to lose? If we win, that's fine; if we don't, that's fine. But let's try, don't be so courageous!" Only a religious person walks and sings happily, he can hear the birds in the trees, he can see the sunrise, he can see the sunlight on the dewdrops, the whole life is so miraculous!He doesn't have to worry because there is no exam, he's going to face it, he's just going to see what's going on, he doesn't ask for anything, he doesn't hold out any hope, he's fresh, young, alive --That's it.That's how one goes to meet God: without being ready to make formulas, without being ready to make theories, without doing many experiments, without many PhDs, no, none of that helps.That's the way one should go—singing and dancing to the temple. If you are alive then you can react to anything, because the reaction is through the life, it is through the heart.When the heart sings and dances, the heart is ready. They arrived, and the king, the emperor, had devised a very special plot.They entered a room and he put a lock on it, a mathematical puzzle, there were many numbers in the lock, but no key, the numbers were combined in a certain way in the lock, the secret was in There, but one has to search for it and find it, and if the numbers can be arranged in a certain way, the door will open.The king went in and said to them, "This is a mathematical riddle, the greatest riddle known to man. Now you must go and find the clue. There is no key. If you can find the clue and answer this mathematical question, The lock will open. The first person to come out of this room will be selected. You start now." He closed the door and walked out. The scientist immediately started working on paper: many experiments, many things, many questions.He watched, observed the numbers on the lock, there was no time to waste, it was a matter of life and death.The philosopher also closed his eyes and began to think mathematically how this mystery could be solved, which was completely new. That's the problem: with the mind, if something is old, the answer can be found; but if something is totally new, how can you find it with the mind?The mind is very efficient with the old, the known, the routine, but with the unknown the mind is totally useless. A religious man never looks at the lock, because what can he do?He doesn't know math at all, he doesn't know any science experiments, what can he do?He just sat in the corner, and he sang nursery rhymes, prayed to God, and closed his eyes.Those two thought that he was not at all a rival: "That's good, because things have to be decided between the two of us." Suddenly, however, they realized that he had left the room, that he was no longer there.The door is open! The king ran in and said, "What are you doing now? It's over! The third person has come out! ". But they asked, "How did it come out? Because he never did anything." So they ask people of that religion. He said, "I was just sitting, and I was praying, and I was just sitting, and a voice inside of me said: You are so stupid! Just go and see, the door is not locked. So I went to the door , it's not locked, there's nothing to fix, so I just walk out." Life is not a problem, if you try to solve it you will miss it, the door is open, it has never been locked.If the door is locked, then scientists will find a solution; if the door is locked, then philosophers may find a system how to open it.But the door is not locked, so only trust can move forward -- without any solution, without any pre-formulated answer, push open the door, get out. Life is not a mystery to be solved, it is a mystery to be lived, it is a deep mystery, trust in it and allow yourself to enter into it.Debate cannot be of any help - with other people or with yourself in your head - without arguing, all debate is useless and stupid. Now let's get into this beautiful story: In some Japanese Zen monasteries, there is an old tradition where a wandering monk debates a question about Buddhism with a local monk. If he wins, he gets to stay overnight. If he loses, he has to Continue to wander. Debating gives you only so much - a night's accommodation, but nothing more. In northern Japan, there are two brothers who are in charge of such a temple.The elder brother is very learned, but the younger brother is stupid, and he has only one eye. It takes two types of people to run a monastery: a learned man and a very stupid man, and that's how all monasteries are run - two types of people: the learned man who has become a monk, And the stupid people who follow them, that's how every monastery is run. So these stories are not just stories, they are telling some kind of fact.If stupid people disappear from the earth, there will be no monasteries; if learned people disappear from the temples, there will be no monasteries either.The existence of the monastery requires these two characteristics.That's why you cannot find God in a monastery, because you cannot find Him in this duality. These monasteries were invented by wise people to exploit stupid people. All monasteries are inventions... wise people are exploiting -- they have become monks.Monks are the wisest people, they are the greatest exploiters, they exploit in such a way that you cannot even betray them, they exploit you for your own good, they exploit you for your own good.Monks are brilliant, for they weave theories out of nothing: all theology, all they create— very impressive! It takes cleverness to create religious theories, and they keep creating such large buildings that it's almost impossible for ordinary people to get into them, and they use such jargon, they use such technological projects, and you can't understand what they're saying.And when you cannot understand, you think they are very profound.Whenever you can't understand something, you think it's very profound -- "It's beyond me." Remember this: Buddha spoke in a very ordinary language that anyone can understand. What is spoken is not the language of the monks.Jesus spoke in a little parable - any uneducated person could understand - and he never used any religious jargon; and general language. Mahavira and Buddha never used Sanskrit, never!Because Sanskrit is the language of the monks, it is the language of the Brahmins, Sanskrit is the most difficult language, the monks make it so difficult, they embellish, embellish, embellish, Sanskrit is exactly what it means, embellish, refine, they It's been refined to such an extent that you can only understand what they're saying if you're very, very learned, otherwise it's beyond you. Buddha used the language of the people: Pali, Pali is the language of the people, the language of the villagers.Mahavira used Prakrit, which is the unrefined form of Sanskrit, Prakrit is the natural form of Sanskrit - no grammar, not much, scholars Not yet in, he hasn't refined the words, made them unattainable.But the monks have been using Sanskrit, they have been using it, now no one understands Sanskrit, but they continue to use Sanskrit, because their whole profession depends on making a gap, not a bridge -- making a gap.If ordinary people cannot understand, only then can they exist; if ordinary people understand what they are saying, they will be lost because they are not saying anything. Once Mulla Nasruddin went to the doctor -- and the doctor had learned the trick from the monks, and they wrote in Latin and Greek, and they wrote it in such a way that even they themselves had to read it again, this difficult.So that no one could understand what they were writing, Mulla Nasruddin went to the doctor and he said, "Listen, keep it simple, just tell me the truth, without Latin and Greek". The doctor said, "If you insist, if you will allow me to be frank, then you are not sick at all, you are just lazy." Nasruddin said, "Okay, thank you, now you write it in Greek and Latin so that I can show it to my family!" Smart people are always exploiting ordinary people, that's why Buddha, Jesus and Mahavira are never respected by Brahmins, scholars, smart people, because, these are destructive, they are destroying their whole Business.Monks are not needed if people understand.why?Because a monk is a middleman, he understands the language of God, he understands your language, he translates your language into the language of God, that's why they say Sanskrit is Dev-bhasa, the language of God : "You don't understand Sanskrit? - I do, so I became the link in the middle, I became the translator, you tell me what you think and I tell it to God in Sanskrit because he only understands Sanskrit . "Of course you have to pay for it. A monastery needs two types of people. There is such a monastery... run by two brothers, the elder brother is very learned, and the younger brother is stupid and has only one eye. What does an eye symbolize in this story?A stupid man is always concentrated: he never hesitates, he is always sure; whereas a learned man is always two-faced: he hesitates, he constantly divides himself in two, he always argues within himself , a constant internal dialogue, he knows both sides. A learned man is dual -- two-eyed; a fool is one-eyed -- he is always sure, he does not argue, he is not divided.That's why, if you look at a stupid man, he looks more like a saint than a learned man; if you look at a saint, he has something like him - stupid, stupid Silly.The quality is different, but some aspects are the same, the labels are different.The fool is only on the first rung and the saint is on the last rung, but both are at the top.The fool doesn't know, that's why he is simple, one-eyed; the saint knows, that's why he is simple, he is also one-eyed, he calls it the third eye.Two eyes have disappeared to become a third eye, and he is also one eye - one!He is a whole, and the fool is a whole, but what is the difference? Ignorance has its own innocence, just as wisdom has its own innocence.The learned man is only in the middle, and this is the split point of the learned man: he is ignorant and thinks he is wise, he is neither on this level nor on that level, he hangs in between, the That's why he's always on edge.一个无知的人是放松的，一个智慧的人是放松的，无知的人还没有开始他的旅程，他还在家里；智慧的人已经到达终点，他也是在家里。有学问的人是在两者之间，要在某个寺院里寻找住宿——甚至只是为了一个晚上也好——他正在流浪。 佛教的和尚们曾经是流浪者，而佛陀曾经说："做一个流浪者除非你到达了，做一个流浪者！不仅是内在，而且外在也是，做一个流浪者——除非你已经到达，不要在到达前停步！"当你已经到达时，当你已经成为一个悉达（Siddha），一个佛陀时，那时你才可以坐下。 无知和智慧有一个品质是相类似的：那就是天真，都不是狡猾的。所以有时它就会发生，一个具有神性的人被当作傻瓜，一个傻瓜——神的傻瓜。圣弗朗西斯（St．Francis）被当作是神的傻瓜，他正是！但是做一个神的傻瓜可能是最伟大的智慧，因为自我失落了。你没有说你知道，所以你是一个傻瓜，因为你不会自称有知识，如果你不说，谁会接受你是一个知者？甚至你声称，也没有人接受。你必须用锤子敲别人的脑袋，你必须去争论使他们为此沉默！当他们无法说什么时，那时，出于嫉妒之心，他们接受"也许"，也许你是。但是他们总是会说："也许"，他们会一直保持那种可能性，直到某一天他们能否认它。 如果你不声称，谁会接受你呢？而如果你自己说："我是无知的，我什么也不知道。"谁会认为你是一个知者呢？如果你说："我不知道。"人们会很快地接受，他们会立刻接受，他们会说："我们以前就知道，我们承认，我们完全赞同你所说的，你是不知道的。" 神的傻瓜！如果你读陀思妥耶夫斯基的……最伟大的小说之一，你才会感觉到这个神的傻瓜的意思。陀思妥耶夫斯基在他的许多小说中，总是有一个人物是神的傻瓜，在《卡拉马佐夫兄弟》中，他就在其中，他是天真的，你能利用他，甚至如果你利用他，他会信任你，你能毁了他，但是你却无法毁掉他的信任——那正是美丽所在。 你会怎么样？如果一个人欺骗了你，整个人类都变成了骗子；如果一个人欺骗了你，你就失去了对人的信任——不是这个人，是整个人类；如果两三个人欺骗了你，你便会断定没人值得相信，所有的信任都失去了。 似乎从开始你就不想相信——只是这么两三个人给你借口。否则你会说："这个人是不值得信任的……但整个人类呢？——我不知道，所以我必须信任，除非相反的被证实。" 而如果你是一个真正有信任心的人，你会说："这一刻这个人是完全不值得信任，这个人是不值得信任……但是谁知道下一刻呢？因为圣人会变成罪人，罪人会成为圣人。" 生命是运动的，没有什么是静止的。在这一刻人是软弱的，但下一刻他或许会有把握，他将不再欺骗，所以第二天如果他来的话，你会再次相信他，因为这天是不一样的，这个人也是不一样的。恒河奔流不息，它不是同样的一条河。 曾经有这样的事发生：一个人来找穆拉·那斯鲁汀，想要借些钱。那斯鲁汀知道这个人，非常清楚这零钱将不会再归还，但他想这是笔很小的钱，"给他吧，即使他不还也没有什么损失，为这样的数目，为什么说不呢？"所以他给了他钱。 三天以后，那个人还了钱，那斯鲁汀很惊讶，这好像是不可能的，这个人还了钱，这真是奇迹。过了两三天，这个人又来了，要借一笔大数目的钱，那斯鲁汀说："老兄！上次你欺骗了我，"他说："上次你欺骗了我！——现在我不再借给你了。" 这个人说："你说什么啊？上次我把钱还给你了。" 他说："对，你是还了，但是你骗人——因为我从来不相信这事，你会还钱。但这一次，不！够啦，够啦！上次你的行为与我的期望正相反，但是够啦，现在我不打算把钱借给你。" 这就是狡猾的头脑怎样工作的。 在这个寺院中，有一个是无知的——单纯的、只有一只眼睛、确信无疑的人；一个是有学问的人，有学问的人总是感觉到很累，因为他为空无工作得如此辛苦，无事也是如此忙忙碌碌，他总是很累。 一天晚上，一个流浪的和尚来请求住宿，哥哥已经学习了好几个小时，已经非常累了；…… 你不可能找到一个有学问的人是不累的。 去，看看！到卡虚（Kashi）的学者们那里看看！总是累，总是累，如此辛苦地用文字工作着。记住，即使是一个劳力者也不会如此累，因为他生活即是工作。当你只用文字，无用的文字，只用头脑工作时，你会很累。生活使人精神倍增！生活使人恢复青春！如果你去花园里劳动，你出汗，但是你会获得更多的能量。你并不失去什么：你去散步，你会获得更多的能量，因为你正活在这一刻中。在你的书房里和在文字中你只是在关闭你自己，你不断地在用文字思考，思考，再思考——这是如此死气沉沉的过程，你会累。一个有学问的人总是会累。一个傻瓜总是新鲜的，一个圣人也总是新鲜的，他们有许多质的相似。 ……所以，他吩咐他的弟弟去辩论。"要在沉默中进行对话。"哥哥说——因为他知道，这个弟弟是愚蠢的，所以，如果你是愚蠢的，那么沉默是金；如果你是圣人，那么沉默也是金。如果你知道，你会保持沉默；如果你不知道，最好也保持沉默。 一个智慧的人是沉默的，因为他知道，并且他所知道的都无法被说出来。一个愚蠢的人不得不沉默，因为无论他说什么都会被人抓到辫子。一个傻瓜能够骗人，如果他保持沉默，但如果他开口，他便不能骗人，因为无论他说什么都会带着他的愚蠢。这个有学问的哥哥非常知道这个弟弟不是一个书生，是一个单纯的人，天真的，无知的，所以他说："要在沉默中进行对话。" 过了一小会儿，那个流浪者来见哥哥，并且说："你弟弟真是个厉害的家伙。" 这个人一定也是一个有学问的人，而如果一个傻瓜保持沉默，他能打败一个有学问的人，如果你开口，就要被人抓辫子，因为那时你进入了有学问的人的世界，用文字，你无法赢。 这个人也是一个有学问的人，一个读书人，要他保持沉默并以此辩论会非常困难。怎样辩论？如果不允许说话……只是用手势，整个事情变得沉默，你所有的聪明失去了，因为如果不允许你说话……那是你唯一的实力，所以如果一个有学问的人是保持沉默的，那么他也能被一个傻瓜击败，因为他的全部的实力失去了，这个实力属于文字上的。 在沉默中，他是一个傻瓜——这就是意思所在。那就是为什么学者们从来不会沉默，他们总是喋喋不休。如果没有人在，他们就与他们自己喋喋不休，但是他们就是喋喋不休，他们无休止地说话，说话，再说话，在内在和外在，因为通过这种说话，他们的实力越来越强，他们变得越来越熟练。但是，如果他们一旦遭遣到沉默，突然，他们的所有的艺术便消失了，他们比一个愚蠢的人更愚蠢，甚至一个笨蛋也能打败他们。他们脱离了他们的职业环境，他们被搁在一边，他肯定是在一个非常困难的境地中。 他说："你弟弟真是个厉害的家伙，他非常机智地赢了这场辩论，所以我必须走了，晚安。" 如果你遇到了一个有学问的人，那就保持沉默，对他做手势，你会打败他，因为他对手势一无所知，他对沉默也一无所知。事实上，对他来讲，不用语言文字是非常困难的，他会立即以为他已经被打败了——他必须离开，去找另外一个寺院，不至于太晚，并去找一个能用语言文字的、用头脑的家伙辩论。 手势是活的。当你摆动你的手时，你的整个存在在摆动它；当你用眼睛看时，你的整个存在在倾注于它；当你走路时，你是整个人在走，你的腿不能独自走，但是你的头脑能独自不停地编织着，编织着，脑袋能自主的，身体的其他部分无法变得自主。所以，如果你想要研究一个人，不要听他说什么，而要看他怎样行动，他怎样走进房间，怎样坐的，怎样走的，怎样看的，看看他的姿势，它们会显示其真实面目。 文字是欺骗者，我们所说的并不是在表露，而是在隐藏，所以保持沉默，看着一个人：他怎样站，他怎样坐，他怎样看，他正在摆出什么样的姿势。身体的语言比你脑袋的语言更真实。身体的语言是非常非常自然的，它正是来自本源，所以要通过它来骗人是非常困难的。你或许是说某件事情，而你的脸正在表明着别的事情。你或许在说："我是对的。"但是你的眼睛，你的神态，你站的姿势，在表示你知道你是错的。你或许通过语言在显示你很自信，但是你的整个身体却在发抖，显示出你不自信。 当一个贼走进时，他是用不同的方式进入的；当一个说谎者出现时，他是用不同的方式出现的；当一个诚实的人走路时，他的走是不一样的，他没有什么要隐藏，他没有什么要骗人，他是真实的，他的走是天真的。正是在你不得不隐秘地做事时，那时看看你自己——你会说一切都不一样了，甚至在你走路时，也在隐藏些什么，你的胃在抽筋，你在警觉，你的眼睛在四处张望：是不是有人正在看着我，我会不会被抓住？你的眼睛是狡猾的，它们不再是天真之池。看看你的身体的动作，它们给了你一幅你自己的更真实的图画，不要去听从语言。 这是我必须一直在做的。人们用了各种各样的欺骗的方法来到我这里，我必须注意他们的姿势，不是他们说的什么，他们或许正在触摸我的脚，他们的整个姿势正在表现自我，所以触摸我的脚是没有用的，他们正在利用它，他们不仅仅在欺骗我，他们也在欺骗他们自己，他们的整个姿势都在说： "自我！"他们无论说什么都是卑下的。 你无法通过身体来骗人，身体比你的头脑更真实。被僧侣们发明出来的所有的宗教告诉你说："反对你的身体，与头脑保持一致！"因为僧侣生活在头脑中，通过头脑来利用人，通过身体是不可能剥削人的，身体是真实的，好几个世纪的不真实的生活也不能摧毁身体的真实，身体保持着真实，它清楚地显示着你是谁。 "他非常机智地赢了这场辩论，所以我必须走了，晚安。" "你走之前，"哥哥说，"请告诉我这场对话。" 他一定非常奇怪，他这样笨的弟弟怎么会是聪明的？what happened?他是个地道的傻瓜——他怎样争论，他怎样辩论，他又怎样赢的呢？所以他要问。 "在你走之前，请告诉我这场对话。" "好，"那个流浪者说，"首先我伸出一个手指代表佛陀。" ……因为一个有学问的人，即使在他做动作时，也将动作作为一种文字，因为他只知道一种语言，如果他在吻他的爱人时，在内心他也要说一个字"吻"，这真是愚蠢；你在吻，不需在内心重复"吻"，但他会。你观察一下你自己：当你在做爱时，你会在内心说："我正在做爱"——多么荒唐！没有人在问，也没有人要被告诉。 为什么你要不断地重复呢？无论当你在做什么时，为什么你都要说它？因为不用语言，你不舒服，只有用语言，你才舒服；与神在一起你无法舒服，与语言的"神"在一起才会满意，那就是为什么有学问的人要去寺庙，要去清真寺，要去教堂，那儿同样他可以喋喋不休，他会与神说个不停—— 都是语言。 克尔恺郭尔，赛伦·克尔恺郭尔曾经说到："当我第一次进入教堂时，我会说，我总是说，抱怨，祈祷，但渐渐地感到很傻，我一直对他说，而我一直没有给予任何机会、任何时机让他对我说。最好就是去听，当你在神面前时，最好是听。"所以他放弃了讲话，不久，他又放弃了所有的祈祷，他只是去教堂，静静地坐着，但在他的沉默中仍然还有语言在他的内部存在，他没有将它们用在外部，而内部它们仍在绕圈子。 所以，不久，他不得不也将内部的语言扔掉——那时才可能只是听，于是你便会进入一个完全不同的层面——倾听的，被动的，接受的，你变成了一个子宫，那时你能接受到真理，那时你不是在说话，那时你不是在进攻，那时只有神在工作，而你正在让她工作。那时他变得全然的宁静，于是他不再去教堂了。 有人问："为什么？为什么你不再去教堂了？" 他说："现在我已经明白教堂的意思了，它唯一的意思就是静默和倾听，这些能在任何地方做到，最好是到其它地方做，因为很多人都去那里，在教堂里说个不停，他们干扰了我。最好是在一棵树下，最好是在天空下。" 在那里教堂是更大的、更自然的。如果你需要宁静，那么神到处都是；如果你需要讲话，那么就去寺庙。但是如果你需要宁静，为什么还要去什么地方？到处都是神，但是你无法宁静。你做事并在内心重复着，你感到饿了。你便说："我饿了。"感觉饿了还不够吗？——除非你说出来，否则你会不舒服，你已经上了语言瘾。 这个人……他一定是一个有学问的人，的确是一个极有学问的人： "好，"他说："首先我伸出一个手指代表佛陀，接着，你弟弟伸出两个手指表示佛陀和他的教导——达磨 （Dhamma）。 " 一个没有语言就无法用姿势的人，他也只会用语言来注释别人的动作，现在来看看这连环是怎么回事呢？你注释你的语言的方法，同样也会用于注释别人的动作。 他正在想："这个手指，一个手指代表……"手指不代表任何人！手指充其量只是它自身，一个手指只是一个手指！为什么要使它成为代表？它不代表任何人，手指是那么美丽，为什么要代表什么呢？但是头脑总是喜欢二手货，只是手指还不够，它必须代表某个人。 如果你看见一朵花，你无法直接地看见花，即刻它一定是种代表，所以你说："你像我妻子的脸。"即使是月亮，你会说："就像我爱人的脸。"多么荒唐！月亮就是月亮，而这个人，当他看到他爱人的脸，就会说："就像月亮"。月亮不足以代表它自身，爱人的脸也不足以表示它本身，而一切事物本身就足够了，没有人是代表其他任何人。 每个人足以代表他自身，每个人都是原初的，独一无二的，没有人是摹拟的。当你说手指代表佛陀时，佛陀是原初的，手指就是摹拟的，不！这是佛陀不能允许的，我不能允许它！手指是如此美丽，不代表任何人，而如果你以为你的手指代表佛陀的话，那么别人的两个手指会代表佛陀和他的达磨——他的教导。 因为你是在理解别人，你不倾听别人。你靠倾听你自己的头脑来理解别人，你注释着别人，当我说什么时，不要相信你听到的和我说的是一样的，当我说某事，你听到某事，但那是与我无关的，他是与你自己的思想过程相关联的。 他的思想过程是："这个手指代表佛陀。"然后别人正在说两个手指，而他得意忘形地不知道他的意思，如果你内心有语言的话，你不能够理解别人，因为那一切都与你的语言、与你的思想过程相关联，而这已经被上过色了。他以为他正在说两件事，不是一件：佛陀和他的达磨——他的教导，他的法则。 "所以我伸出三个手指。"——看看与内部的连接。 你一点也没有与别人交流，你是在与你自己交流！这就是疯狂的意思，疯狂意味着与别人不相干，只是趋向内心，将你的新的一刻与过去相连，新的经验与旧的经验相关，不断地注解上色。 "所以我伸出三个手指，"因为如果他说："佛陀、达磨，"我就说："佛陀、达磨、僧伽（Sangha）——佛陀，他的教导和他的追随者。" 这里的三是：这些是佛教徒的三个庇护所。当一个比丘想要被点化，成为比丘，他说："Buddhamsharanamgachchdhami——我去，我将佛陀作庇护，Dhammamsharanam gachchhami，我将教导作庇护，Sanghamsharanangachchdhami，我将僧伽，佛陀的追随者作庇护。"这些是三个庇护所，佛教的三块宝石。 但这个人不是在看别人正在做什么——毫不相干！ —— 所以他伸出三个手指…… "所以我伸出三个手指代表佛陀，他的教导和他的追随者，于是你聪明的弟弟，在我面前挥动着他紧握的拳头，表示那所有的这些都来自一个整体的领悟。" 随后流浪者走了。 一会儿，弟弟进来，一付非常痛苦的样子。 "我知道你赢了那场辩论。"哥哥说。 "赢什么啊，"弟弟说，"那个流浪者是个粗鲁无礼的人！" "噢！"哥哥说，"告诉我辩论的主题。" "嗨，"弟弟说，"当他看到我时他就伸出一个手指来侮辱我只有一只眼睛。" 你根据你自己来理解：你看一本书，你唯一所能理解的就是你已经知道的，你倾听时，你是里过去在注释，你的过去加了进去。只有一只眼睛的人总是觉知到他的缺陷，他一直带着缺陷，他正在到处寻找侮辱，没人为你担心，但如果你自卑，于是你就老是看见有人在侮辱你，你对此深信不疑，并且就会注释，别人或许在说："佛陀。"你却见到他在说你只有一只眼睛，没有人会在乎你的眼睛，但是我们根据我们的理解来注释。 一个人去找贝兹德（Byazid），一个苏非神秘家，问他……他说："一年后再来，因为你现在有病，你的内在是骚动不安的，我无法讲述真理，因为你不会领悟它——你会误解它的。所以一年中尽量恢复健康、宁静、静心，然后再来。如果我感觉你能听时，我会告诉你，否则你就去找别人。" 那人听完，回去了，在一年中努力地恢复了健康、宁静、平和——但是再也没有返回。 所以贝兹德问："那个寻求者怎么了？" 有人说："我们问过他，为什么你不再来了？他说：现在我不需要来，因为我能在我所在的地方，领悟贝兹德能说什么。" 这是个悖论：当你没有准备好，你询问，但是没什么能告诉你；当你准备好了，你也不询问了，但只有那时才能告诉你。 如果你只有一只眼睛，那么你总是在找寻侮辱，而如果你在找寻侮辱，你总能找到——这就是问题。如果你在找寻什么的话，这就是不幸：你会找到的。不是有什么人在侮辱你，是你会找到的，所以不要去找这样的事，否则你到处都会找到的。 有人会笑——不是在笑你，因为你是谁呢？为什么你要以为你自己是世界的中心呢？这是自我主义的倾向。你走在大街上，有人在笑，而你以为他们在笑你，为什么笑你呢？who are you?为什么你要将自己看作是整个世界的中心？有人在笑——在笑你；有人侮辱——在侮辱你；有人生气——在对你生气。 在我的整个生活中，我不曾遇到有一个人对我生气，有许多人生气，但没有人对我生气，因为我不是世界的中心，他们为什么要对我生气呢？他们生气——那是与他们自己的存在有关，与我无关。我曾经遇到有人对我使用暴力，但他们并不是对我，这个暴力是发自他们的过去，我不是这个暴力的根本原因，我或许是藉口，但我不是原因。只是藉口——如果我不在那儿，有人也会做同样的事，有人还会成为受害者，所以我在那儿只是一种巧合。 当你的妻子对你发疯，你在那儿，这是一种巧合，逃开！不要想太多，她是在对你生气，她生气，你在场，仅此而已。 她会对仆人，对孩子，对钢琴，对任何事生气！ 每个人都通过他自己的过去来生活，只有佛陀生活在现在，没有人生活在现在。 这个人以为："好，他正在表示我只有一只眼睛，他真粗鲁，他在侮辱我只有一只眼睛，但是因为他是一个新来的人，我想还是对他礼貌些。" 但是那时你想你应该礼貌些，你是不礼貌的，你怎么会呢？——有一个念头进入：如果你认为别人是粗鲁的，那么你已经变得粗鲁——现在它并不是问题，因为，"别人是粗鲁的"这个念头本身是由于你的粗鲁已经出现，通过你的粗鲁别人也显得粗鲁，你已经替别人上了色。别人正在用他的手指代表佛陀，他甚至还没有看到你的眼睛，他并不在乎，他只想要一个住处。 一个佛陀——被解释成："他正在表示我只有一只眼睛，他真粗鲁！"当你认为别人是粗鲁时，反观自身：你是粗鲁的，那就是为什么你解释成这样。 但是为什么你是粗鲁的呢？因为粗鲁是保护自己缺陷的一种方法，那些粗鲁的人总是遭受自卑的折磨。如果一个人一点都没有自卑的负担，他就不会粗鲁，粗鲁是他的保护伞，通过粗鲁来保护他的缺陷。他说："我不允许你碰我的缺陷，我不允许你击中我。" 他保护，但是保护（protection）成了投射（projection），他认为你是粗鲁的，然后他才能粗鲁，这是多么粗鲁的方式！首先，你必须证明别人是粗鲁的，而你的自我仍然在说："我要尽量礼貌些。" 当你礼貌时，你的礼貌只是外面的而已，在内在，粗鲁已经进入，不一会儿，它就要爆发出来了。 "但是我想因为他是一个新来的人，我要礼貌些，所以我伸出两个手指，祝贺他有两只眼睛。" 这只是虚假的，如果你感觉到别人在侮辱你只有一只眼睛而别人有两只眼睛，你怎样会祝贺别人呢——你怎么会祝贺呢？你会深深地嫉妒，你怎么会祝贺呢？ 祝贺怎么会来自嫉妒呢？但是你的所有的祝贺都出自那样的形式，它是一种礼貌的形式，它是文化、礼仪，如果你被人打败了，你甚至还要向他祝贺他的胜利，多么虚伪！如果你是这样的人，你不会进入战斗，当你在战斗时，你是敌人，而你现在被打败了，你去向他祝贺，但是那儿有深深的嫉妒，你愤怒，你想杀死这个人，试试看——将来，你会清楚！ 但是社会需要礼仪，为什么社会需要礼仪呢？因为每个人都如此喜欢暴力，如果没有礼仪，我们会互相不停地斗个你死我活。社会制造了障碍，不允许你与别人一直斗争下去，否则生活将是不可能的。 其实，你是在与人不停地相互斗个你死我活。你的礼仪、你的文化、文明的行为、礼貌，正隐藏着事实，这些不允许真正的文明产生。一件虚假的事——那就是为什么每十年需要一次大的战争，在其中，所有的礼仪，所有的礼貌，所有的道义都被扔掉了，你能毫无内疚地杀戮。于是杀人变成了游戏，你杀的越多，你就越了不起；你越粗野，你就越是伟大的战士。 回到你的国家，你被当作英雄。帕达玛布仙（Padma－bhushan），马哈维恰克拉（Mahavirchakra），维多利亚十字勋章将会被授予你，你会得到奖章，为什么会得到这些奖章呢？变得野蛮，变成杀人犯，因为你已经是一个伟大的杀人犯，所以国家授予你这奖章，而我们称这些国家为文明，杀人犯被认同，杀人犯被赞赏…… 但是这是杀大批人的杀人犯。杀单个人的杀人犯——会坐牢，那是不允许的，只有当整个社会发疯时，那就是战争，一切都被搁在一边，你的真实的本性被准许了，那就是为什么当有了战争时，每个人都感到高兴，应该是正相反的——当有了战争时，没人应该感到高兴，但是每个人都感到高兴，因为现在你被准许成为动物，你总是想成为它，你的文化、礼仪、礼貌，都是将动物隐藏在背后的装饰方法。 这个人说："所以我伸出两个手指来祝贺他有两只眼睛，这时，这个无礼的坏蛋伸出了三个手指，表示我们之间只有三只眼睛。" 无论你做什么，你的缺陷都会进入，别人在说，"佛陀的三颗宝石。"但是对你来讲，你的伤疤又出现了，你试图礼貌些，你试图不粗鲁，你甚至试图去祝贺，但是你就是你，你的想法继续着。 现在他伸出三个手指，你的头脑再次加入，并说："这个坏蛋！他正在说我们之间只有三只眼睛。"他再次表示你只有一只眼睛，这太过份了，够了！ "所以我气疯了，威胁地用拳头打了他的鼻子——所以他走了。" 正是从最开始他就疯了，甚至在他们遇到以前他就发疯了，因为你不可能制造出疯狂，如果它不是早已经存在。你能制造仅有的东西早已经在那儿了，你的创造不可能无中生有，它只是将不明显的状态变成明显状态。生气就在那儿，你不需要制造它，某个人变成了藉口——它就出现了，你不是对他生气，他不是原因，你正带着生气——他变成了藉口。疯狂是在里面的，如果你不是已经发疯的话。但是我们总是以为有人使我们生气，有人使我们忧郁，有人使我们这样，那样。 没有人使你怎样，即使你一个人你也会发疯，你也会生气；即使整个世界消失了，你也会有悲伤的时候，也会有高兴的时候，也会有生气的时候，也会有宽恕别人的时候—— 尽管没有人。 这是你内在的故事的展开，一个有所理解的人会领悟到：整个的事情是我的展开，你只是给了我机会、情景，但是整个的事情是我的展开。 一颗种子落入土壤，发芽，一棵树开始成长，土地、空气、雨水、太阳，它们都只是给予机会。但是树正隐藏在种子里，你正带着你的展开的整棵树，其他每个人都成为机会，无论何时发生什么，不要向外看，要往内看，因为事情，当它发生时，是与你的过去相关联的，不是与当时的人相关。 "我气疯了，威胁地用拳头打了他的鼻子——所以他走了。" 哥哥笑了。 哥哥能明白两种观点，他能明白这个有学问的流浪者从来都没有与这个人对过话，从来都没有跟这个人作过手势；他也能明白这个傻弟弟从来没有理解手势的意义。他们从来没有接触过——深渊就在那儿，没有桥。他们辩论，他们得出结论，一个人输，一个人赢，而他们从未相遇——哪怕一会儿。he laughed. 这个笑便能开悟，这个笑能成为一个深刻的领悟，一种蜕变。如果这个笑不是对这个弟弟的愚蠢，或是那个流浪者的愚蠢，如果这个笑是对整个情景：头脑有怎样的功能，两个头脑是如何无法相遇，两个人的过去是如何无法相遇，两个头脑总是那样的分离——没有方式使它们相遇、相互融合……如果他是在笑整个情景，不是这个弟弟或有学问的流浪者——因为如果他是在笑这个弟弟或那个流浪者，那么这个笑无法变成开悟，他将仍然是老样子——但是如果他是在笑整个情景：头脑有怎样的功能，头脑怎样辩论，头脑怎样在内部进行自身运作，从不走出去，头脑怎样老是封闭，它从来不打开的，头脑怎样只是一个内在的梦，一个恶梦…… 如果他真正地领悟，这个笑将变成一种脱落，桶，整个桶掉下，水跑了出来——没有水，没有月亮。