Wednesday, July 09, 2014

讀牟宗三的兩點心得

去年,我曾經在這裡向大家簡單介紹牟宗三先生的生平,並且握要地解釋牟先生所提出的"綜合的盡理精神"和"分解的盡理精神"。 "綜合的盡理精神"指在中國文化裏,從一般人的日常生活到追求知識和做學問的興趣,基本上傾向強調道德行為的表現和探索──例如如何做好一個皇帝,好官員,好父親,好兒子,好丈夫,好朋友,甚至好親戚──結果,比較缺乏對外在物理世界現象的研究和分析。 相反,牟先生指出,西方文化中的"分解的盡理精神",强調做學問要對概念先下定義,結果引導出西方文化長期以來對科學數學哲學的鑽研,奠定了客觀研究學問和為求知而求知的精神,和科學發展的基礎。 牟先生的著作非常多,其中他最關心的問題是:中國為什麼一直不能有民主?今日中國的民主發展應如何進行? 若問大家為什麼民主好?有人答得出,有人答不出。答不出的最少認為民主是理所當然,答不出也是好的。 牟先生是學者,他有一個簡單而又非常有用的理論根據,解釋在政治上民主是必須的。他說:‘惟民主政治可以保障天才"。他認為人的天才不能以作政治領袖為唯一的出路。天才的充分發展可以讓其轉為科學哲學藝術宗教方面的,即轉為文化的,此是在社會文化上以追求真理而充分發展其天才,而實現對人類之貢獻。而這種天才之能在社會上得其充分的發展,惟有民主制度的政治始能容許及保障它。如果人的天才在文化上不得其出路,則只有集中於政治權力之爭奪。此決非人類之福。"牟先生深信惟民主政治方能保住人類及文化。 他的第二個理由:"民主政治不但保住社會上天才之文化發展,而且在政治上亦不許有以天才英雄自居而得以充分發揮其權力欲者。這句話的意思是說:’天才‘二字直不許用於政治領袖或政治家,而只許用於科學哲學宗教藝術家等方面。普通說,某人有政治天才,可以作政治家。但是有可以作政治家的天才,却不同於那種以超人自居的獨裁者之為天才。故天才亦不可用於政治上。這是因為它的本質限制了他。天才的性格是孤峭獨特的,此最易於向文化學術方面發展,亦最易在這方面表現。而政治家不能是孤峭獨特的,他必須順俗從眾,為百姓人民謀福利。他必須為公共利益而守法尊制度,依法而退,依法而進。他的境界不能太高。政治不能不講法度,法度就限制了他不能為天才。他有政治的天才,只能說他有適應法度運用法度的本事,他是在限制中運用他的知識才能的。只有獨裁者才毁棄一切法度,而自認他本人就是法度。這些狂妄人終必毁滅。所以要說政治,就不能說天才。" 牟先生胸襟博大,一方面他悲憤地感受到在過去二三百年來,中國社會無論在社會文化政治經濟和學術的混亂;另方面,他早在1958年便和三位學者,發表宣言,憧憬著中國文化早晚可以貢獻給世界,發展出天下一家的景象,而他窮了一生精力研究的儒家精神與學問,會對建立天下一家之情懷作出大貢獻。 他們是這樣說的:‘我們承認人類現在雖然有許多國家,而凡未能民主建國之國家,皆須一先走上民主建國之路道。但是人類必然歸於天下一家。所以現代人,在其作為一國家之公民之外,必須同時兼備一天下人之情懷,而後世界真有天下一家之一日。為養成此情懷,儒家,道家,墨家,佛家之思想,皆有所貢獻。墨家要人兼愛,道家要人與人相忘,佛家要人以慈悲心愛一切有情,儒家則認為"人皆可以為堯舜"仁愛精神,亦是遍及於一切人的。 但是起源西方的基督教要先說人有原罪,其教徒是本上帝之旨意,而由上而下,以此救人。而且,基督教為一制度宗教,有許多宗派之組織, 不易融通。基督教有天堂觀念,也有地獄觀念;異端與不信者,是可入地獄的。如此,則基督教對人之愛雖似一無條件,仍可以有一條件,即信我的教。此處實有一極大之問題。 照儒家的意思,則只要是人,同有能成聖人的能力和機會。儒家並無教會之組織,亦不必要人皆崇拜孔子。此即使儒家之教,不與一切人之宗教成為敵對。則人類真要有天下一家之情懷,儒家之精神實值得天下人之學習,以為未來世界之天下一家之準備。‘ 各位同學,牟先生給我們的啓示是:深入了解好的東西,就算現實環境惡劣和混亂,你一樣有信心和見到希望。如果明年我還有機會回來和大家講話,我願意採會用答問會的方式和大家交流我們對中國文化的體驗。

Saturday, June 07, 2014

子女是父母的過去

鄭先生育有一子一女,以下是女兒近日就兩代關係有感而發所寫的信:

Dear Mom,

Thank you for your impassioned and expressive email. I think of you every June 4 and of the way you take a personal stand every year for something you believe in strongly, and I, like you, can feel the power of memory and the risk of forgetting. Our minds -- and, for those who believe in them, our souls, or our essential selves -- are really all that we bring and leave behind in this world and the impact we have on one another, the ways we touch each others' lives, are, to me, the closest thing we have to 'immortality.' I am not saying we should strive to be immortal; I am saying that we are more than our time on earth and that the difficult distance between life and nothingness finds a beautiful bridge in things like memory and family, and the idea of passing on a legacy or a set of core values, or even of having brought children into the world who then go on to have their own impact as well.

I think Liang's Mother's Day email expressed it perfectly: something about caring for children forces a restructuring of the brain towards selflessness, towards thinking about how each action and decision will affect someone else before oneself.

What I find inspiring in your example, and in Dad's, is that you have both translated that selflessness toward the world at large and that you are both engaged in the complicated political and social challenges we face.

Living in Quebec and in Montreal, where, much like in Hong Kong, there is a daily culture clash between English and French -- in Hong Kong, I see the clash between the Hong Kong citizens and mainlanders, I am learning a lot about living with uncertainty, with disagreement and with a fundamental clash of values and human rights. I won't go so far as to call it a clash of civilizations and really I think Fukuyama is now outdated for our interconnected world where people from all different countries move to and live in all different countries and kids grow up having moved all over the world, but regardless, I feel like I am able to practice not only how to be respectful and civil towards people with whom I strongly disagree, but additionally, to practice how to contribute towards a fun-loving, healthy and creative society regardless. I do this because I want the world to be a better place for my children, but I also do it because I have watched you both in action and know that we are all powerful -- individually and collectively, as a nuclear family and as an extended family, for each other, but also for ourselves.

Love,

Xiang