AMONG the talks of the period I am describing, that is, the end of 1916, G. several times touched upon questions of religion. And when anyone asked him anything connected with religion G. invariably began by emphasizing the fact that there is something very wrong at the basis of our usual attitude towards problems of religion.
"In the first place," he always said, "religion is a relative concept; it corresponds to the level of a man's being; and one man's religion might not be at all suitable for another man, that is to say, the religion of a man of one level of being is not suitable for a man of another level of being.
"It must be understood that the religion of man number one is of one kind; the religion of man number two is of another kind; and the religion of man number three is of a third kind. The religion of man number four, number five, and further is something of a kind totally different from the religion of man number one, number two, and number three.
"In the second place religion is doing; a man does not merely think his religion or feel it, he 'lives' his religion as much as he is able, otherwise it is not religion but fantasy or philosophy. Whether he likes it or not he shows his attitude towards religion by his actions and he can show his attitude only by his actions. Therefore if his actions are opposed to those which are demanded by a given religion he cannot assert that he belongs to that religion. The vast majority of people who call themselves Christians have no right whatever to do so, because they not only fail to carry out the demands of their religion but they do not even think that these demands ought to be carried out.
"Christianity forbids murder. Yet all that the whole of our progress comes to is progress in the technique of murder and progress in warfare. How can we call ourselves Christians?
"No one has a right to call himself a Christian who docs not carry out Christ's precepts. A man can say that he desires to be a Christian if he tries to carry out these precepts. If he does not think of them at all, or laughs at them, or substitutes for them some inventions of his own, or simply forgets about them, he has no right whatever to call himself a
Christian.
"I took the example of war as it is the most striking example. But even without war the whole of life is exactly the same. People call themselves Christians but they do not realize that not only do they not want, but they are unable, to be Christians, because in order to be a Christian it is necessary not only to desire, but to be able, to be one.
"Man in himself is not one, he is not 'I,' he is 'we,' or to speak more correctly, he is 'they.' Everything arises from this. Let us suppose that a man decides according to the Gospels to turn the left cheek if somebody strikes him on the right cheek. But one 'I' decides this either in the mind or in the emotional center. One 'I' knows of it, one 'I' remembers it—the others do not. Let us imagine that it actually happens, that somebody strikes this man. Do you think he will turn the left cheek? Never. He will not even have time to think about it. He will either strike the face of the man who struck him, or he will begin to call a policeman, or he will simply take to flight. His moving center will react in its customary way, or as it has been taught to react, before the man realizes what he is doing.
"Prolonged instruction, prolonged training, is necessary to be able to turn the cheek. And if this training is mechanical—it is again worth nothing because in this case it means that a man will turn his cheek because he cannot do anything else."
在我描述的那段时期，也就是1916 年尾，在谈话中葛吉夫有几次触及宗教的问题。当有人问他有关宗教的任何事情，葛吉夫一定强调说，事实上我们对宗教问题的态度基本上便有很大的错误。
「首先，」他总是说，「宗教是个相对的观念；它和人的素质层次有关；而且一个人的宗教有可能一点也不适合另外一个人，也就是说，在某种素质层面的人的宗教并不适合在另一素质层面上的人。
「必须要了解，第一种人的宗教是一种；第二种人的宗教是另一种；而第三种人的宗教是第三种。至于第四、第五、以及更高的则是另一种完全不同于第一、第二、以及第三种人的宗教。
「其次，宗教是做；一个人不仅只是思考或感觉他的宗教，他还尽可能『活出』他的宗教，否则便不是宗教而只是幻想或哲学罢了。不论他喜欢与否，他都是透过他的行动来表示对宗教的态度，而且他也只能透过他的行动来表示。因此，如果他的行动违反了某一宗教的要求，他就不能声明他属于该宗教。有极大部份声称他们自己为基督徒的人根本无权这么做，因为他们不仅不遵守他们的宗教要求，甚至想都没想过这些要求是必须被遵守的。
「基督教禁止杀戮，然而所有我们演进的过程都在发展杀戮技术与战争，我们怎能称自己为基督徒？
「不遵守基督训诫的人没有权称自己为基督徒。一个人如果努力执行这些训诫便可以说他渴望成为一个基督徒。如果他一点也不想，或嘲笑它们，或以自己的一些发明来取代它们，或只是忘记它们，那么他无论如何也没有权称自己为一个基督徒。
「我举战争为例是因为这是最骇人的范例，但即使没有战争，人类的整个生活仍然完全相同。人们称自己为基督徒，但他们并不知道不只是他们不想要，他们也没有能力成为基督徒，因为要成为一个基督徒必须不只是渴望，还需要能够成为一。
「人在他里面并不是一个，他不是『我』，他是『我们』，或者说得更确切一点，他是『他们』，而一切都从这开始发生。让我们假设有个人决定依照福音书，如果有人打他的右脸他就伸出左脸，但这是一个理智或情感的『我』做的决定，一个『我』知道，一个『我』记得——其它则否。让我们想象这真的发生了，有某人打了这个人，你认为他会将左脸转过去吗？永远也不会，他甚至连想一下的时间都没有，他将回敬打他的人一巴掌，或者他会开始叫员警，或只是逃走。在他明白他在做什么之前，他的运动中心会以它习惯的方式或以它曾经被教导的方式去反应。
「人需要延长的教育、延长的训练才有可能转过脸颊，而如果这训练是机械的——就一文不值。在这案例中，这意味着这人会转过他的脸颊是因为他无法做其它任何事。」
用户评论