2009年11月27日星期五

What kind of Buddhist I am NOT

Certain nouns are so widely used with evolving times that there is no more consensus among those who are using them regarding their actual connotations. ‘Socialism’ has very different meanings in Northern Europe, Cuba and China. ‘Subconscious’ becomes so common a word in daily life that we cannot be sure of what Freud refered to in his psychoanalysis theory. In the times of St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas, if a man said that he was a ‘Christian’ he would accept ‘a whole collection of creeds which were set out with great precision, and every single syllable of those creeds’. (Why I am not a Christian, Bertrand Russell) Based on the above, I feel the compulsion to state what it means to me being a Buddhist, more than twenty five hundred years after Śākyamuni was dead.

To many people in China, the word belief only has meaning in a religious aspect. In fact, everyone has his own belief about the universe which maybe kept unsaid. No matter if one has some religious belief or not, one’s understanding to life is unique in its breadth and profundity. That is why a lot of natural scientists can be Christians as well—they don’t have to actually believe in the Virgin Birth. Everyone has his own ‘religion’, be it democracy, freedom, science, or law as in the case of Socrates’ death. But if you accept anything without ruminating, your belief becomes superstition. ‘[I]ndividual scientists do sometimes slip back into the vice of faith, and a few may believe so single-mindedly in a favorite theory that they occasionally falsify evidence.’ (Is Science a Religion? by Richard Dawkins) That is to say, there is no difference between religious belief and superstition, unless it is an emotional difference. Can you really differentiate confident from arrogant, or adamant from obstinate?

Buddhism has diverse meanings among individuals as well. To me, as the original intention of any religion in the world, Buddhism purifies my soul. Moreover, Buddha’s thoughts are more like philosophy to me. Hannah Arendt refused the label of phylosopher on the grounds that philosophy is concerned with “man in the singular”. Exactly, Buddhism is philosophy to me because Buddhas are not keen on accounting for the genesis of the universe, but only for the arising and ceasing of man’s desire and worry. This does not conflict with my belief in science. My personal beliefs are different from those of other people. This put me in an embarassing position when I encounter other Buddhists for the following two reasons:

The first reason applies to Islam, Christianity and Buddhism. ‘What really moves people to believe in God is not any intellectual argument at all. Most people believe in God because they have been taught from early infancy to do it, and that is the main reason.’ (Why I am not a Christian, Bertrand Russell) Religion, as any cultural form, is heavily inertial. Chinese people have been indoctrinated with deep-rooted traditional values by their families: Confucianism, Buddism and Chinese traditional medical philosophy. We do not think whether these values make sense or not before our independent thinking is established. Cliches include: ‘When Heaven is about to place a great responsibility on a great man, it always first frustrates his spirit and will.’ ‘Chinese traditional medicine is both purely natural and without any side effects.’ Just as children born in Christian nations hear from their parents things like ‘God is love.’ ‘Jesus saves.’ ‘Good people go to Heaven, bad people go to Hell.’ If one accepts something without examining it, then this is called supersition. Beliefs contain nonsense without empirical evidence. The application of Yin and Yang theory and Five Elements theory in Chinese traditional medical philosophy are purely philosophical. The circulation around Six Realms theory in Buddhism lacks evidence as well and therefore is not part of my beliefs.

Another reason that Chinese people favour Buddhism is Chinese contradictory psychology. For most of the last three thousand years, the power of the Chinese empire cannot be mentioned in the same breath with its surrounding countries. The troops of Genghis Khan invaded as far as Hungaria and Poland in thirteenth century. However, the modern history of China turns out to be a history of shame; humiliated by western powers. In this case, Chinese people become contradictory in psychology. On the one hand, Chinese people are arrogant and this is very well dipicted in the writing of Lu Xun, a literary giant in modern China.

“A says, ‘China has vast territory and abundant resources and its civilization dates back to five thousand years ago. Moreover, the morals are the best in the world.’ This is conceit to the full extent.

B says, ‘Although material civilization in foreign countries is advenced, China is excellent in its spiritual civilization.’

C says, ‘All that foreign countries have, China had it already. Science in whatever discipline is exactly what whoever already advocated in Chinese theory.’ The typical ‘B’ and ‘C’ kinds of people represent those who contest that ‘Chinese learning is for fundamental principles and Western learning for practical application’” (Hot Wind, Lu Xun).

On the other hand, this kind of conceit comes from inferiority. Since the the ‘reform and open policy’ in 1978, Chinese people find few things which they can be proud of when they look around their surroundings: McDonald, jeans, automobiles, and so on and on. None of these are Chinese inventions. The contradictory psychology makes Chinese people boost, without reservation, things labeled Chinese: Buddhism, Confucianism, Chinese traditional medical philosophy, Four Great Inventions of ancient China, Beijing Opera, and so on.

Although people boost Chinese culture, they vote by feet. The books of political dissident Noam Chomsky censuring severely western societies are always on the top of the raking list of the bookstores. Protestors outside the 2009 G-20 Pittsburgh Summit can again and again seek the death penalty for capitalism, but the feet of Aficans, Latin Americans, and Asians swarming to Europe and North America will not be stopped. The human brain is so bright, but our feet have their own opinion. Compared to our hands holding a banner, our mouths with eloquence, and our impulsive brains, feet are more honest.

Postcolonial critics influenced heavily by poststructralism deem that the emphasis of native traditions in postcolonial countries roots in peoples’ need for a cultural identity. This identity makes the characteristics of postcolonial countries seem fixed from an outsider’s perspective. A lot of people believe in Buddhism on the grounds that it is so China and so Oriental, while I am tending to hold the position that Buddhist philosophy and western philosophy share common elements. If the differentiation of Chinese traditional medicine from other medicine is so emphasised that it refuses empirical evaluation and regulation, it will never be accepted worldwide. For the same reason, as a Buddhist, I’m sad to see Buddhist philosophy labeled as ‘Oriental’.








Notes:
1. Please see Five Elements theory at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wu_Xing

2. Please see Yin and Yang theory at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yin_and_yang

3. Please see Six Realms at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six_realms

4. Please see Four Great Inventions of ancient China at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Great_Inventions_of_ancient_China

2009年11月24日星期二

我是一个怎样的佛教徒

有这样一类名词,随着时代的变迁和推移,正因为被太多人使用,其所指已经不能在使用它们的人之间达成共识。在北欧、古巴和中国,“社会主义”所代表的意思也许完全不同;“潜意识”一词已经成了日常词汇,以至于我们分不清它弗洛伊德的理论中到底意味着什么;在圣奥古斯丁时代和圣托马斯·阿奎那时代,如果有人宣称自己是基督教徒,这意味你接受一整套严谨精确地制定的信条,而且全心全意、刚毅坚定地信仰这些信条的一词一句。基于这样的原因,在释迦摩尼创立佛教二千六百多年以后的今天,我想陈述自己作为一名佛教徒的立场。

在很多人看来,信仰只有宗教上的含义。事实上,对于世界的规律和本质,每个人都有自己的看法和信念,只是未必说出来而已。不论你是否有宗教信仰,对人生体验的深度和广度都是有所差别的。这就是为什么有很多自然科学家也同时是基督徒的原因——他们不必真的相信圣母玛利亚是通过圣灵怀孕的。可以说,我们每个人都有自己的“宗教”:民主、自由、科学、法治,都可以成为我们的信仰。当然,一旦你不假思索地固执于以上任何一种信仰,就成了迷信。“个别科学家确实有时候滑入了宗教信仰,并且少数人非常固执的相信最喜爱的理论,以至于他们有时候伪造证据。”(理查德•道金斯《科学是一种宗教吗?》)因此在某种程度上说,信仰和迷信没有区别。如果有,那也只剩下感情色彩上的差异。你真的分得清固执和执着,自信和狂妄吗?

佛教徒各自相信的东西同样是千差万别的。跟任何宗教的本意一样,首先是我用来净化心灵的工具。第二,佛教对我来说是一种哲学观。正如汉娜阿伦特拒绝被称为“哲学家”的理由一样,“哲学关心的是单个的人”,佛教并不热衷于解释世界起源之类的问题,而只关心人心的烦恼起灭。这跟我的理性以及对科学的信仰毫无冲突。这使得我在跟其他的佛教徒在一起的时候常常会感到尴尬,因为很多人信奉佛教是源于以下两个原因:

第一个原因适应于所有宗教信仰,正如罗素所言,“驱使人们信仰上帝的不是任何理智的理由。大部分人信仰上帝之是因为他们从婴儿时代就被如此引导。”(《我为什么不是基督徒
》)因为宗教是一种文化,文化具有巨大的惯性。中国人从小就被自己的家庭灌输一些根深蒂固的传统思想,除了佛教,还有孔子的哲学思想,中医中药。我们不知道它到底有什么道理,因为在获得独立思考能力以前就已经相信它了。我们小时候总是听到,“中医是博大精深的祖国传统文化,中药因纯天然而无毒副作用。”就像基督教国家的小孩子总是听到,“上帝是爱我们这些芸芸众生的,我们也要爱上帝,爱是无所不在的。”不假审视地接受一样东西,我管它叫迷信。中医的阴阳,五行理论,说到底是一种哲学思想,是不能用来治病的。佛教中也有一些无稽之谈,比如“六道轮回”,它们并不在我的信仰范围之内。


另外一个中国人吹捧佛教的原因是近代才形成的,那就是矛盾的民族性格。在几千年的文明史中,中国的强盛在一大半时间里是周边的国家不可望其项背的。但是中国近代史却成了受尽凌辱的耻辱史。这使得当今的中国人的性格自相矛盾,中国人的自大鲁迅早在近一百年前就讽刺过了:

甲云:“中国地大物博,开化最早;道德天下第一。”这是完全自负。
乙云:“外国物质文明虽高,中国精神文明更好。”
丙云:“外国的东西,中国都已有过;某种科学,即某子所说的云云”,这两种都以“中学为体西学为用”的人物。
——《热风.随感录三十八》

但这种自大的根源其实是自卑。改革开放以后,中国人发现自己身边已经没什么可以引以为豪的了,吃穿住用行处处都收益于西方文明,这种强烈的反差使得大家对那些仅存的中国文化大吹大擂:佛教、中医、四大发明。

“好在这世上有‘用脚投票’这事,让我们能够拨开口号的迷雾去判断制度的优劣。世界头号公共知识分子乔姆斯基痛批西方的书尽可以永远占据排行榜第一,G20或者WTO开会时示威者尽可以一次一次宣布资本主义死刑,但是非洲人、拉美人、亚洲人往欧美移民的脚步却不会因此停止。人类的头脑充满智慧,但是我们的脚却自有它的主张。”“它往往比我们高举标语的手、能言善辩的嘴、荷尔蒙涌动的头脑更诚实。”——刘瑜

受解构主义影响颇深的后殖民主义认为,落后的国家过于强调自身的特性来源于追求二元对立(Dichotomy),这反而会使这种特征过于死板和模式化。很多中国人信佛教是觉得佛教很东方,很中国,但我更认为佛教的哲学思想与很多西方哲学家的思想有相通之处。跟中医一样,如果过于强调自己与他人的差异性,反而会阻碍它走向世界。作为一名佛教徒,这是我所不愿意看到的。

真是一个烂政府

今天去Fairway,发现这儿门口也有校报。拿了一份儿准备回去的公交车上看,结果差点气出心脏病。

第九版:Olympic torch relay money better spent elsewhere, by Sylvia Nicholles

“I am tired of out government telling uas there is no money for healthcare and education while shelling out for a spectacle such as the Olympic torch relay”,作为一个世界上社会公共福利最好的、国家财政性教育经费占GDP比值连年高居在百分之三左右的国家的公民,我有资格严重鄙视你。

“but the Vancouver Olympic Games are something my generation is going to be paying off for a long time. And not only in monetary costs, but in social costs as well.” (温哥华冬奥会的开销是我们这代人在将来很长一段时间内要偿还的,而且这钟代价不仅是经济上的,同时还有社会代价。) 祖国需要你,你怎么可以说不!

第六版: Let’s play cops and zombies: protest takes over torch relay, by Bronwyn Lawrie and Kat Eschner

“The Zombie March, organized by No-2010 Victoria, took almost five hours…It disrupted the torch route in several places near the downtown.”这儿的警察都是吃屎长大的?

“We’re not hearing about the people on the streets, we’re not hearing about the people who have been affected due to gentrification(中产阶级化), we’re not hearing so many of the marginalized stories(被边缘化的故事).” 摊手,我只能为那一对奥运期间因上访被判监禁的七旬北京老人默哀三秒钟了。

“to protest the Olypics, which they called an abuse of public money and public rights.”才花几个臭钱啊就穷叽歪?权力,权力,你们只知道权力。这么个烂政府早晚要被这些刁民给整垮。

咦,不对,这帮孙子不会是专门办这么一份儿报纸来气我们中国人的吧?


Nov.9th, 2009

2009年11月10日星期二

危机中的民主

上个月17日,我抽空去温哥华参加了龙应台老师在UBC的新书发布会及演讲。虽然当日天气很恶劣,跟我的收获比起来就显得微不足道了。

其实与新书相比,龙应台老师的演讲更能引起我的共鸣。这是一本纪实体小说,白板报的王佩老师说此书唯一有价值的部分是龙与那些战争幸存者和老兵的对话实录,因为龙的文笔很一般。我以为龙本来就不是以文笔见长的作家,而是以其作为一个知识分子所具备的责任心和正义感,好在这些实录的价值看来是公认的。

这些采访是龙在两岸搜集资料撰写本书的过程中拍摄的。采访对象中有的是从大陆赴台的作家,也有当年存活下来的普通士兵,其中并没有任何是非判断,至少录像中没有,我只看了到灾难中的个体和那场战争对某个渺小命运的作弄:被采访的两位被抓去当壮丁的台湾原住民的甚至分不清共军和国军;大陆被迫参军的士兵在赴台的时候绝大多数以为这是暂时撤退,谁也不晓得到了彼岸就实行了戒严;一个免于受战争罪处罚的老兵在受命屠杀澳大利亚战俘的时候根本没意识到自己在犯罪,活脱脱《Reader》的东方演绎。相比之下,真不明白什么样的国家会把这样一场由两伙无耻政客导演的手足间自相残杀的悲剧拍成《见过大爷》那样的主旋律片的。

演讲快要结束的时候的进行了互动,一位台湾朋友的问题大意如下:台湾自从1996年总统实行民选以来,同样也出现了诸多问题,各方面都不尽如人意,您怎么看?龙应台老师回答到,我想你的意思是说,大陆的很多朋友都在观望台湾的民主化,但是现在看来,政府也会出现腐败等问题。那我们的前途在哪里,是吗?是的,台湾的民主化不是一帆风顺的。但要记住,民主并不是一个静态概念,实现了民主化之后就停止了。台湾的民选是华人世界的一件大事,台湾也同样有几千年封建统治的积淀,也经历过一党独裁下的三十八年戒严,但台湾现在却努力摸索民主化道路。台湾摔的每一个跟头,都是为了大陆可以避免摔同样的跟头。从这个意义上讲,我们每个人都应该为台湾故意鼓掌。言毕台下掌声雷动。

“民主”和“科学”这两个概念,从上世纪初传入中国以来,恐怕是最被膜拜却最未被国人所理解的两个概念了。据说,匹兹堡大学的许倬云老师说过这样的话:“中国人先把科学当作洪水猛兽,后把它当作呼风唤雨的巫术,直到现在,多数学习科学的人还把它看成宗教来顶礼膜拜”,而他自己终于体会到,“科学是个不断学习的过程。”“民主”何尝不是个不断前进的过程?

大陆保守势力的观点是:你看你台湾搞民主搞得一团乱,还好意思动不动跟大陆比民主?其实除了台湾,拉美的民主制度也是搞得一团糟的例子,洪都拉斯的总统不是被逼得连自己的国家都不敢回?但这种观点蠢得就像平时生什么病都去医院抽血、化验、拍片,但得了癌症去治,结果医院没辙。于是说,“看,就说西医不靠谱吧,还得信中医。”即使是那些被公认为民主制度比较完善的国家也会出现各种问题,比如1958年成立的法国第五共和国是在诸权平衡的名义下建立的,然而占据绝对地位的行政权很少有平衡制约力量。事实上没有哪个民主国家从来没有腐败现象,但民主的真正目的在于建立起一种权力的制衡,而不是杜绝腐败本身。从这个意义上来说,民主总是处于危机中,因为这是一种始终需要反思的制度。

前几日有一位赴澳洲的朋友说那里治安不好,法制一点都不健全。我的观点同样是,法制健全不是说没有人犯法,而是说你的权利被侵害后总有法律渠道可以解决问题。而中国现在的问题是权力失衡导致的滥用,人民没有权利监督税收,没有权利上访,没有选举权和被选举权……

毛曾因为头脑一热所以干了很多没有被他自己预料到后果的糟糕事情,实际上如果制度不改变,把你放在毛那个位置上有可能比他还要糟糕。我们之所以要建立起一个可以相互制衡的民主制度,就是为了避免只是因为某一个人的异想天开就造成整个民族的灾难。因此有些成天叫嚣着天灭中共的极右分子在我看来跟认为日本应该血债血还的民族主义者骨子里是一路人。虽然我一直批评中国政府,但我并不在乎是哪一个政党执政,就像我认为判断一个制度是否是剥削人的,跟它所被称呼的名字是没有任何关系的。况且,在中国目前缺乏权力制衡的情况下,敢于批评政府的人不是太多了,而是太少了。

最后,我想用毛在他为数不多头脑清醒的时候说过的话作为本篇结尾:

“现在的世界潮流,民主是主流,反民主的反动只是一股逆流。”——《愚公移山》 (一九四五年六月十一日)

2009年11月1日星期日

关于写作的两点建议

1. 每一个比喻都是一个危险的开始

一流的作家用一流的比喻,三流的作家用三流的比喻。由于我们不知道自己入没入流,运用比喻以及类比的时候就要非常慎重。比喻和类比都是利用人们共有的发散性思维试图引起读者共鸣。因此说到底,其中是没有什么逻辑性的,用得是否贴切变成它们运用是否得体的唯一标准,当然要是脑子够乱怎么都会觉得得体。所谓三流的比喻就像这样,“人生如梦”,“婚姻如船,爱情如帆”等等,很多只是生拉硬拽出来的。很多一流作家也用过一些烂的比喻或者类比。比如钱钟书在他玩票儿性质的《围城》里就用了不少:“同路的人,一到目的地,就分散了,好像是一个波浪里的水打到岸边,就四面溅开。”“他坐立不安地要活动,却颓唐使不出劲来,好比杨花在春风里飘荡,而身轻无力,终飞不远。”

既然比喻/类比是利用人的发散性思维,其目的就在于使句子更加persuasive,或者我用一个不好听的词,manipulative。刘瑜老师在《民主的细节》里用过这样一个类比:“据说民主的实施需要民众具有‘民主素质’,我不知道有什么比公开透明理性的参与本身更能训练民众的‘民主素质’,正如我不能想象除了跳到水里学习游泳,还有什么别的学习游泳的方式。”其实这是我本人非常喜欢的一个句子,但我要提醒大家的是,尽管这样的类比非常具有说服力,但推行民主制度和学习游泳的方法之间到底有多大的相似性,其实是未知的。

2. 正确预设观众/读者/受众(audience)

每个人在写作的时候都会无一例外地预设他的读者,只是对于大部分非专业人士,这种预设是无意识的。徐静蕾的博客也有,那就是她自己,因为只有她能看懂自己的流水账。另外一种通常也将自己设为读者的文体是日记。专业的撰稿人在下笔之前一定会想清楚这篇文章到底是写给谁看的,是知识分子还是普通大众,是年轻人还是中年人,是中国人还是外国人。由于语言作为表达思维的工具具有极强的模糊性,在作者至文本至读者的过程中会出现很多歧义。举我前两天的一个twitter为例:“单个的日本人都挺正常的,但作为一个集合的日本民族就有不少变态的民族性格;单个的中国人也挺正常的,但作为的一个集合的中华民族就是个奇怪的民族。一百年前,鲁迅交织着炽热的爱与恨批判了那群人。一百年过去了,这群人还是那群人。或许,中国这片大地上自始自终就只有一群人。”

要想对这一小段文字有反应,必须先知道日本人有什么“变态”的,还得知道谁是鲁迅,尤其是知道那个中小学课本以外的鲁迅、夏志清眼中的鲁迅。对于最后一句话,要是你读过柏杨先生的《中国人史纲》那效果就更好了。换言之,我跟文本之间好像存在一个合同(contract),预设其实就是为了找到那些会与文本建立起同样合同的读者。如果把上段话翻译成英文,没有一个难懂的词,但老外根本就看不懂。从这个意义上说,李敖在《看谁的文章写得好》中的观点“所谓文章,基本问题只是两个:一、你要表达什么?二、你表达的好不好?”是有问题的。因为要判断表达的好不好,是由作者和读者来共同完成的。