发现心中的日月读后感锦集

　　《发现心中的日月》是一本由刘娜 / 王墨馥 编著著作，重庆出版社出版的平装图书，本书定价：16.50元，页数：152，特精心从网络上整理的一些读者的读后感，希望对大家能有帮助。

　　《发现心中的日月》精选点评：

　　●看过的佛教著作里面自认为最牛的一本

　　●非常好

　　●学佛心障

　　●西方语言表达佛学内涵；其中猴子观点解释“五蕴”及“六道”有种新鲜感，也较生动地阐释了“我”的形成

　　●振聋发聩，醍醐灌顶 接下来就是如何在实际生活中去体会、领悟其中讲到的哪怕万分之一 (ps 以上评论是给秋阳创巴仁波切的同名书的评论，现在这本乃豆瓣狸猫换太子产物，与本短评无关。。）

　　●破除迷雾。

　　●扫除迷信

　　●《敞开之道》那章非常适合INTJ的学佛者阅读，不过对初学可能会引起误解。

　　●翻译的并不是非常好，很多地方的用词怪怪的，但是依然无法掩盖住那独到见解所闪烁出耀眼的光芒！

　　●看的电子版，呵

　　《发现心中的日月》读后感(一)：提防修道上的陷阱

　　摘录一段：正确修道，是一个非常细密的过程，不是天真地投入即可有成。歧途甚多，曲解道心和以自我为中心来解释道心的情形，都可能因误入歧途而发生；我们会欺骗自己，自以为是在发展道心，其实是在用修道法来加强我慢。这种根本的曲解，可称之为修道上的唯物。

　　《发现心中的日月》读后感(二)：振聋发聩

　　振聋发聩

　　如果说宗萨仁波切是个大学者，我相信创巴仁波切是个真正的成就者，这一点也从楚布寺极为出家朋友那里得到了印证。

　　这本书适合略有智慧，对佛法有正见已入心的读者深入阅读，刚接触佛法的道友反而不适合阅读，反而有可能断了慧命。

　　《发现心中的日月》读后感(三)：一些摘抄

　　真师之言，仅作留存，并不时温习、自勉之。

　　全是摘抄，个人仅作了一些大致的整理和归纳，觉得放在“书评”里可能更合适一些，请希望读到评论的童鞋见谅。

　　“把真理转化为生活，把生活转化为内在。哪怕看起来好像是个彻底反传统的叛逆，只要他走在内在生命的旅程中，那就是真正的传统，他就是觉悟的上师。”（印度总统S.拉达克里希南的演讲）

　　当老人（顶果钦哲仁波切）迈进灵堂的瞬间，宗教的奇迹再次发生——已经圆寂数日，早已冷了的创巴仁波切的法体，突然转过头来，对着自己生前的上师做出了及其微小，但确是让每个人都能察觉到的一个虔诚的笑容！

　　这就是第十一世秋阳·创巴仁波切最后的故事。

　　引言：

　　“正确修道，是一个非常细密的过程，不是天真地投入即可有成。歧途甚多，曲解道心和以自我为中心来解释道心的情形，都可能因误入歧途而发生；我们会欺骗自己的，自以为是在发展道心，其实是在用修道法来加强我慢。这种根本的曲解，可称之为修道上的唯物。

　　佛法虽然是无神论，但不与有神论的修行相悖，二者的分别毋宁说是在于重点与方法。修道上的唯物，是所有宗教在修行上共同遭遇的难题。佛教的秀发是从我们的惑与苦着手，力求弄清惑与苦的来源；有神论的修法则是从神的丰足着手，力求提高有神存在的感受。但那妨碍我们与神相通的即是我们的惑与不善，所以有神论也须对付惑与不善。例如，修道上的我慢，对有神论和佛教，都同样是个难题。

　　藏传佛教对”我“的运作所产生的三种迷惑用”唯物三王”来隐喻：“身王、语王、意王”。

　　身王：

　　神经质地最求身体地舒适、安全和快乐。－是指使得我们如是 去做、使得我们想要控制自然的那种偏执。

　　语王：

　　对世间运用智能，这种性向最成熟地产品是意识形态（包括民族主义、各种宗教），目的在与为我们提供身份和行为准则，并对万事万物如何发生及为何如此提出解释。

　　是以概念为过滤器来遮蔽我们的视线，不让我们直见实相。概念受到过分重视——概念被用作巩固我们世间和我们自身的工具。

　　意王：

　　为保持有“我”之惑做出的努力。麻药、瑜伽、祈祷、禅修、催眠、各种心理疗法，都可如是利用。

　　佛发现三王诱惑我们的方式是从根本上创造一个神话：我们是实存者。但神话究竟实假的、是大骗局、是我们的苦难之根。

　　解脱无需用力，不用力即是解脱；达此无我境地便是成佛。

　　修道上的唯物

　　我们所收集的大量知识和经验，只是“我”之部分展现，只是“我”之浮夸性的一部分。我们向世人炫耀这些知识和经验，藉着这种炫耀，我们让自己安心，肯定自己实安安稳稳地在做“修道者”。

　　上师证得法教之真谛，而传给弟子得却是灵感，弟子则一如其师过去那样，因得此灵感而觉悟。所以法教永远赶得上时代，法教不是“古代智慧”，不是古老传说，法教不是当作知识传承下来，不是那样传承，而是切身体验。我们必须在自己的经验上下功夫。

　　“修行之道不是那么走的。我们必须在自己的经验上下功夫，修行之道是孤独的个人之道。”

　　外来的援助帮不上忙。你若不愿意让自己成长，你就会陷入自我毁灭的迷惑过程；那是自杀，不是他杀。迷惑之所以有力，原因就在于它能导致自我毁灭。

　　问：“我”为何那么难以放下？

　　答：人怕空虚，怕没同伴，怕没形影相依者。与人无缘、无事无关，根什么都攀扯不上，这些感受是很可怕的。即使只是想想，不是实际经验，也会令人感到极端恐怖。一般来说，我们怕的是空，怕在坚实无可靠之处落脚，怕失去那被视若坚实确定之物的身份。这种恐惧会对我们构成极大的威胁。

　　放下

　　一旦敞开，遍随处可落。

　　我们一旦把自己视同最低者，就不再怕失去什么。如是，我们把自己准备成一个空的容器，可以接受法教了。

　　我皈依法即是皈依生存的法则或如实的生活，我愿睁开眼睛如实去看人生的境遇；不愿以修道或神秘的眼光视之，而愿看到人生的实况。

　　上师

　　和“道友”和“上师”的关系很容易发展成一种类似于恋爱的关系，不过，热情早晚会消退，而你也必须面对自己的生活处境和自己的心理状态。就像“蜜月期”一过，你不再仅是感到你所爱之人是你注意的焦点，同时也开始注意他或她的生活方式。

　　我们可以把上师看做纠缠我们和嘲笑我们伪善之鬼。在了解自己的真想一事上，可能含有一种穷凶极恶的性质。根本智是不断出现于各种生活状况中的，此智锐利、无坚不摧，以致到了一定阶段，即使你想拜托它，也摆脱不掉。根本智、如来藏或佛性，永远是每一个人经验里都有的，无法逃避。法教还说：“最好不开始；一旦开始，最好完成。”所以除非必要，你最好不入修行之道；一旦踏上去，你就是已经真的做了，不能再退出，已是无路可逃了。

　　灌顶

　　我们必须把自我的粗俗品性毫不保留地全交出来。

　　自欺

　　寻求任何一种福乐或梦想的实现，都必将遭受对等的失败和沮丧。

　　难行之道

　　此道不合乎我们的期望，我们所期望的是：涉入佛教是一段温和、愉快、充满慈悲的过程。其时，此道难行，是硬碰硬的心对心，你若敞开自心，原意相晤，则上师也会敞开其心。这里面没有奇迹可言，敞开是双方共同创造的情况。

　　要紧的是我们必须布施而不望回报。这是真正的难行之道。

　　敞开之道

　　敞开之道的入门在与体验暴露自己，以真面目做人，把自己的优缺点全部呈现给道友，且自行修道。

　　温情是自觉内心不断生起善念时所有的那种快感。不管你在做什么，你都不会像勉强修禅时那样觉得枯燥无味、度日如年，其实，禅修时轻松愉快、纯出自然之事，是不断跟自己友好的行为。

　　如是，悲心成为了你通往外界的桥梁。对自己的信心和悲心，令你想与生活共舞，想与世间的诸般活力沟通。若无这种启发和敞开，修心之道便成了轮回的欲道，你仍被困在改善自己之欲、实现梦想之欲中。

　　悲心与成就完全无关。悲心广大豁达，真发悲心的人，不知他是对别人慷慨，还是对自己慷慨，因为悲心是随缘布施，没有方向，没有“为己”、“为他”之念。悲心充满喜悦，那是自然生起的喜悦、信心常在的喜悦、极感富足的喜悦。

　　我们可以说悲心是富足的根本心态：反贫穷的心态，对贫穷的战争。悲心意含宽广的思路，对自己，对世间都更自在，更大方。此即为何藉着小乘来的第二乘名为“大乘”。悲心的心态是，人生本来即富，无须致富。如果没有这种信心，禅修根本不能化为行动。

　　敞开不是把什么东西给别人，而是放下自己的需求和需求的基准——这就是布施波罗蜜。

　　菩萨行有如照在一百碗水上的月亮，同时出现一百个月影，每碗水中都有一个。这不是月亮有意如此，也不是谁设计出来。敞开指的即是这种绝对的信任和自信。敞开的悲心也是这样运作，不是刻意去制造一百个月亮，以便让每一碗水中都有一个月影。

　　你这个月亮只是在那儿敞开着，水湾也许反映你，也许不反映你，你既非在意，也非不在意，你只是在那儿而已。

　　那种敞开地规模之大是革命性地，全面性地。慈悲意味着你如实做一个成年人，但仍童心未泯。

　　敞开的空间与日常生活

　　因此，我们必须回到日常生活的问题，回到最平凡实在的问题。这就是为什么要说日常行为的单纯和精确非常重要。你若得见敞开的空间，就应回到原来你所熟悉的哪些让你闷得可怕的生活状况里，更仔细深入地观察他们，直到你发觉其坚实无稽，之道你见其本性为空。

　　关于“爱”

　　我要说的可能会令很多人不快，但实际上，爱恐怕不只是美丽、浪漫和喜乐感受。爱不仅跟世间之美结交，同时也跟丑恶、痛苦、嗔恚来往、爱不是天堂重现。爱心或悲心，或敞开之道，是离不开实相的。要发爱心——遍满宇宙的大爱，不管你想叫它什么——你必须如是地接受人生的全局，接受其光明，也接受其黑暗，接受其善，也接受其恶。你必须对人生敞开自己，与人生沟通。这就好像是从高空俯瞰世间：有明、有暗，二者皆收眼底，你不会想要护明抗暗。

　　所谓“爱”地关系通常是采取这两种模式之一，不是我们被别人喂，就是我们喂别人。

　　我们面临的基本问题，似乎是我们太致力于证明什么，这一点与偏执狂和贫穷感有关。你一想要证明什么或得到什么，你就不再是敞开的了，因为你必须检查每一件事，必须把每一件事安排得正确无误，那是非常偏执的生活方式，并不能真证明什么。

　　投影是你在镜中的影像。由于你对自己没有把握，世间就反映你的没把握给你看，于是你心中便开始为此影像所萦绕。你的没把握让你烦心，其实那完全是你在镜中的影像。

　　你根本无须去找开端，当下就是原始状态，故无寻找开端之理。当下即是开端，根本无始。

　　幽默感

　　从什么不是幽默来看什么是幽默感，会很有趣。缺乏幽默似乎是由于以“冷酷得事实”为本得心态。有此心态者，为人处世都非常冷酷，诚实得要命，严肃得要命，用个比喻来说，他就像具活尸。他生活在痛苦中，脸上老是带着痛苦得表情，他体验过某种冷酷得事实——现实——他严肃得要命，到了成为活尸的程度。严酷的活尸为幽默之反，那种情形犹如有人手持利剑站在你得背后，如果你不好好地禅修，如果你不乖乖地坐正，你背后地人就要下手了。或者，如果你不好好地、诚实地、直来直往地过日子，有人就要打你。这是不必要地自我监视或自我观察所产生地不自在地感觉。不管我们坐什么，都老是受到监视和检查。其实，监视者不是“大哥（big brother），而是”大我“（big me）！我的另一面在监视我，在我背后，就要下手，就要指明我地缺失。这种做法，无乐可言，谈不上幽默感。

　　人间是剧场（宗萨仁波切对秋阳创巴仁波切有过很精准的评论）

　　幽默感来自遍满地喜悦，这种喜悦不卷入”彼此“之战，所以能有空间扩展成完全敞开地情况。喜悦能发展成全面地喜悦，能看到或感受到整个地面或敞开地地面。这种敞开地情况里，没有丝毫界限或假装地严肃。你若想把人生看做”重要事物“，你若想强令人生严肃，好像每一件事都是大事，那就可笑了。干嘛小题大做？

　　幽默感包含看出两个极端并列时所显示得根本讽刺，所以你不会对它们认真，不会认真玩它们那种希望与恐惧得游戏。此即为何修道得经验时那么微不足道，为何禅修时一切经验中最微不足道的。

　　全面的觉知刻意让它看见发生奋斗的空间，从而看出其讽刺性和幽默性，它不再只是奋斗，同时也开始体会奋斗及奋斗的无用。

　　对于“苦乐”的理解和幽默感：

　　我想，苦乐出于同样的背景。一般而言，人视苦为坏，视乐为好，以致乐被看做喜悦与幸福，而跟天道连在一起。苦则让人联想到地狱。因此，如果你能看出排斥痛苦以便得乐、拒受大苦而奋力求乐之中的荒谬与讽刺，你会觉得这一切都很有趣，人对苦乐的态度里，少了一些幽默感。

　　六道

　　饿鬼道之苦，主要不是苦在所求不得，而是苦在贪得无厌。（这是因为基本上猴子迷恋的是饥渴的状态，不是饥渴的满足）

　　四谛

　　“散漫之念，似蚱蜢之念、似展览之念、似电影之念。”

　　菩萨道

　　“菩萨”的意思是：“敢走菩提道者。” “菩提”的意思是“觉”或“觉境”，这并非说菩萨必已完全觉悟，而是说他愿行觉者之道。菩萨道的六度：布施、持戒、忍辱、精进、禅定、般若。

　　我们在一生中，通常都有很多期望、我们奋力追求，而这种行为多是基于冲动。我们一发现令我们兴奋的美好事物，我们就拼命去追，而早晚会被推回来。我们越是向前推进，我们就越会遭到逼退，因为冲动是一种强大而无智慧的动力。冲动的行为，犹如无眼之人乱跑，犹如盲人力图走到目的地。

　　你根本无须强迫自己去做什么。你与情况不停地交往、不停地共舞。这种关系犹如太阳地照耀和植物地生长。太阳没有造就植物，植物只是反映阳光，其生长情况地发展，纯出自然。

　　我们不一次做一件事。我们做得是一件事，心里想地却是许许多多其他的事，使得我们地心很不清明。

　　我们自以为了知事物地实相，其实，我们只看到我们对事物的看法。

　　证得空性，并不是说整个世间都融入空间，而是说你开始注意到空间，感觉到空间不再是那么拥挤。

　　不是“克服烦恼”，而是“转换烦恼”，跟降魔是一回事。

　　我们会发现烦恼不可貌相，实含甚多之智和敞开的空间。问题在与我们从未正确地体验烦恼。我们以为战斗和杀戮表示忿怒，其实这些都是另一种逃避，都是一种发泄烦恼地方式，而非实际如实体验烦恼，我们尚未正确地感受到烦恼的本性。

　　一旦你如实体验烦恼，烦恼的恼人性即被转化。转化不是说消除烦恼的活力特质，而是说将此特质转化为智，这是非常需要的。

　　顶礼大德，顶礼仁波切！

　　《发现心中的日月》读后感(四)：创巴是个很有争议的人物

　　http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ch%C3%B6gyam_Trungpa

　　酗酒，乱交，吸毒，最后死于酒精中毒

　　=======================================

　　Controversies

　　There exist a number of controversies surrounding Trungpa's behavior.

　　Despite the fact that as a monk he was supposed to be celibate, Trungpa began havng sex with women at the age of thirteen.[21] He nonetheless presented himself as a monk who was keeping the vinaya purely, and did not formally give back his vows until 1968.[22]

　　Trungpa was known for his drinking of alcohol.[23] He began drinking regularly shortly after arriving in India, also a violation of his monastic vows.[24] Before his coming to America, Trungpa, while under the influence, drove a sports car into a joke shop in Dumfries, Scotland. He was left partially paralyzed and often in need of assistance to walk. On some occasions he was carried off-stage for being too drunk.[25] David Chadwick recounts:[26]

　　uzuki [Roshi] asked Trungpa to give a talk to the students in the zendo the next night. Trungpa walked in tipsy and sat on the edge of the altar platform with his feet dangling. But he delivered a crystal-clear talk, which some felt had a quality – like Suzuki's talks – of not only being about the dharma but being itself the dharma.

　　Two former students of Trungpa, John Steinbeck IV (son of novelist John Steinbeck) and his wife, wrote a sharply critical memoir of their lives with him in which they claim that, in addition to his addiction to alcohol, Trungpa had a "$40,000-a-year cocaine habit, along with a penchant for Seconal. . . although his drinking and sexual exploits were never kept secret, his staggering coke habit was well concealed from his students."[27] Among the things they found appalling:

　　Women were trained as 'consorts.' That meant they knew what to do when he threw up, shit in the bed, snorted coke till dawn, turned his attention to other women and maybe even got in the mood for a threesome. Our little band of recovering Buddhists began to ask people if they thought this flagrant behavior constituted religious or sexual abuse. The standard answer you get from the male good old boys is . . that they never . .heard any woman complain about sleeping with Rinpoche. (I use that term loosely, because for years he was alcoholically impotent and would devise little sexual games such as using a dildo known as 'Mr. Happy' or insisting women masturbate in front of him.) . . . Many women, who felt they were no more than chattel, silently left the scene.[28]

　　Another former student, Stephen Butterfield, noted that "Trungpa told us that if we ever tried to leave the Vajrayana, we would suffer unbearable, subtle, continuous anguish, and disasters would pursue us like furies . . . doubting the dharma and associating with heretics were causes for downfall . . .if this was the consequence of merely leaving the organization, what supernal wrath might be visting upon me for publicly question or discussing my experience of it？"[29] Butterfield noted the "disquieting resemblances" to cults, noting "to be part of Trungpa's inner circle, you had to take a vow never to reveal or even discuss some of the things he did. This personal secrecy is common with gurus, especially in Vajrayana Buddhism. It is also common in the dysfunctional family systems of alcoholics and sexual abusers. This inner circle secrecy puts up an almost insurmountable barrier to a healthily skeptical mind."[30] Nonetheless, he ultimately concluded about his experience of Trungpa's organization, "a mere cult leaves you disgusted and disillusioned, wondering how you could have been a fool. I did not feel that charlatans had hoodwinked me into giving up my powers to enhance theirs. On the contrary, mine were unveiled."[31]

　　Trungpa was also famously antagonistic toward democracy; Butterfield noted "his views always reflected his dislike of democracy . . proposals for membership control of his organization were squashed."[32] Of Trungpa's purportedly "secular" Shambhala teachings, Butterfield said "they convey a definite authoritarian political outlook, elevating the leader above the follower, and silencing heresy," and that "the Shambhala mythology becomes increasingly complex and cultish in the upper levels."[33]

　　An incident that became a cause célèbre among some poets and artists was the Halloween party at the Fall, 1975, Snowmass Colorado Seminary, a 3-month period of intensive meditation and study of the Hinayana, Mahayana, and Vajrayana vehicles of Tibetan Buddhism. The poet W. S. Merwin had arrived that summer at the Naropa Institute and been told by Allen Ginsberg that he ought to visit seminary. Although he had not gone through the several years worth of practice required, Merwin was insistent he attend, and Trungpa eventually granted his request – along with his girlfriend as well. At seminary the couple stayed to themselves. At the Halloween party, after many, including Trungpa himself, had taken off their clothes, Merwin was asked to join the event, but refused. On Trungpa's orders his Vajra Guard forced entry into the poet's locked and barricaded room; brought him and his girlfriend, Dana Naone, against their will, to the party; and eventually stripped them of all their clothes, onlookers ignoring Naone's pleas for help and for someone to call the police.[34] The next day Trungpa asked Merwin and Naone to remain at the Seminary as either students or guests. They agreed to stay for several more weeks to hear the Vajrayana teachings (which center around samaya), with Trungpa's promise that "there would be no more incidents," and Merwin and Naone's assertion that "it would be with no guarantees of obedience, trust, or personal devotion to him."[35] They left immediately after the last talk. In a 1977 letter to members of a Naropa class investigating the incident, Merwin concluded,

　　My feelings about Trungpa have been mixed from the start. Admiration, throughout, for his remarkable gifts; and reservations, which developed into profound misgivings, concerning some of his uses of them. I imagine, at least, that I've learned some things from him (though maybe not all of them were the things I was 'supposed' to learn) and some through him, and I'm grateful to him for those. I wouldn't encourage anyone to become a student of his. I wish him well.[36]

　　Author Jeffery Paine commented on this incident that "Seeing Merwin out of step with the rest, Trungpa could have asked him to leave, but decided it was kinder to shock him out of his aloofness."[37] However, he also notes outrage felt in particular by poets such as Robert Bly and Kenneth Rexroth, who began calling Trungpa a fascist.[38] Rexroth (in Miles, 1989) offers the observation that "Many believe Chögyam Trungpa has unquestionably done more harm to Buddhism in the United States than any man living", and called for his extradition from the United States.[39]

　　Trungpa's choice of Westerner Ösel Tendzin as his dharma heir was controversial as Tendzin would be the first Western Tibetan Buddhist lineage holder and Vajra Regent. This was exacerbated by Tendzin's own behavior as lineage holder. Tendzin was gay and sexually involved with students while knowingly carrying HIV, one of whom became infected and died.[40]

　　Rick Fields, historian of Buddhism in America,[41] writes that Trungpa "caused more trouble, and did more good, than anyone I'll ever know."[42]