只知孔丘,不知盗跖 When one know little confucianism and know nothing about anti-confucianism Robber Zhi

Posted On 29/04/2007

Filed under Food for thoughts

Comments Dropped 2 responses

龙应台 – 活的文化,死的理解 (收录在 《百年思索》 一书)

在《游民文化与中国社会》的序言里,李慎之先生主要提出一个质疑 :如果只以正统文化的观点了解中国,我们是不是遗漏了极重要的“隐性社会”而得到的并非真相或全貌?他说,改革开放二十年来文化研究重新热起,但是学者们的研究角度可能仍旧“认为中国大体上是孔孟教化下的‘以仁为体,以礼为用’的礼仪之邦”,而事实上“中国还有一个历来被文人学士忽视的游民社会”,与官方的、正统的意识形态对立。要了解“真正”的中国,游民文化的深层结构不能不挖掘。
我不能不想起盗跖(音:席 xi)这个家伙。盗跖是个大流氓,黑道里的“大哥”,带着九千个小流氓,“横行天下,侵暴诸侯”;他抢人家的牛马,强奸人家的妇女,不顾自己的父母兄弟,甚至也不是什么劫富济贫、盗亦有道的罗宾汉。想以仁义礼教去感化他的孔丘找到他时,他正在煎人肝。圣人和强盗交锋的结果是可以想象的:盗跖威胁他,“再不滚开就把你的肝也挖来煎 ”。孔丘面如死灰地落荒而逃。

孔丘的价值和史观成为两千多年来中国的正统,但是盗跖——别说他是寓言人物,寓言往往比所谓事实还要接近真相——难道没有属于盗跖的价值系统和史观吗?显然有的。 他认为孔子 “矫言伪行, 以迷惑天下之主,而欲求富贵焉,盗莫大于子。天下何不谓子为盗丘,而乃谓我为盗跖?”大哉斯言!用现代的语言来说,监狱里的抢劫犯也许只盗了数得出的钱,高居要职的达官贵人袁世凯们所盗的可能是整个国家。谁是真正的大盗,得看用的是谁的标准。

盗跖的史观也是偏离正统,令人咋舌的。“黄帝不能致德,与蚩尤战于涿鹿之野,流血百里。尧舜作,立群臣,汤放其主,武王杀纣。自是以后,以强凌弱,以众暴寡。汤武以来,皆乱人之徒也。”盗跖自己是个无恶不作的暴徒,却称他人为 “乱人之徒”, 而且俨然自成逻辑,理直气壮。

一个道德家或许必须在孔丘和盗跖之间做一个谁是谁非的抉择,可是一个史学家、社会学家、哲学家、任何一个文化研究者,如果只知有孔丘而不知有盗跖,他对文化的认识一定是片面的,可疑的。 但是倒过来说,如果只知有盗跖而不知有孔丘,结果恐怕也是一场灾难吧。而中国历史上只承认盗跖不承认孔丘的时代可并不少。不知慎之先生是否同意,真正的问题或许并不在于居正统地位的中国文人学士忽略游民文化的重要,而在于,正统地位其实常常易位; 当游民本身变成统治者时,文人学士反而变成被踩在脚底下的“隐性社会”。杜亚泉的解析实在一针见血,他说,游民取得政权后就贵族化,再建贵族化政治,而这里所谓“贵族”性,就是 “凡事出于武断,喜压制,好自矜贵,视当世人皆贱”(录自王元化先生 《思辨随笔》)。所以在政治史上,贵族文人与游民痞子轮流占据
所谓正统地位;前者统治时,游民文化当然被排斥在正统之外,但是后者统治时,游民价值独霸主流,倒过来压制知识传统,以文人为“贱民”。盗跖这个甲级流氓在文革时不是被捧出来作为批孔的造反英雄吗?孔丘在二十世纪不是果真变成了“盗丘”吗?

看着马来西亚现今社会的情形, 还有一大班人在发 ”宏愿学校“的梦。

当发梦的人对西方文化一知半解下, 连盗跖都不知道是谁,却硬要把中华文化当是糟糠绊脚石。 无知的把整个国家的文化重要的一环毁掉。

—————————
Many Malaysia English educated, or even Malay educated people, will note Confucianism as the main Chinese philosophy.

However, when Betrand Russell arrive Shanghai and study Chinese history, he notice Chinese philosophy are much complex than what the western people though at the time. Today, a Sinology can pointed out the misconception of mainstream Confucianism thinking. Indeed, Chinese philosophy are much complex than merely Confucianism, today, it represent part of the school of Eastern philosophy (as vs Western Philosophy). The philosophy of Zen, Daoism, hundreds of school studies, Confucianism, Neo-Confucianism, legalism, and even anti-Confucianism Tao Che。

In Zhuangzi writing : ‘Robber Zhi’, there is chapter. Where the Confucius try to convince the Robber Zhi to surrender. And this is what Robber Zhi says

“I’ve also heard that in ancient times there were lots of birds and animals but few people, and the people all gathered together in protective nests in order to avoid them. In the daytime they gathered acorns and chestnuts, and at night they perched up in the trees. That’s why they were called the clan of the nest building people. The people in ancient times didn’t know they were supposed to cover their bodies with clothing. In the summer they gathered firewood, and in the winter they warmed themselves in front of the fires. That’s why they were called the people who understood how to live.

By the time Shen Nong came along, they would lie down wherever they happened to be and would get up when they felt like it. The people knew who their mothers were, but didn’t know their fathers. They coexisted in the places where deer made their homes. They’d plow the land and eat the food they produced. They’d weave and stitch their own garments. They had no reason to cause harm to each other’s hearts, and in that way their virtues flourished unhampered. Even so, Huang Di wasn’t able to sustain this virtue, and he ended up at war with Chi You in the wilderness of Zhuo Lu, and the blood flowed for hundreds of miles.

When Yao and Shun came along they established a hierarchy of government officials. Tang showed that a ruler could be deposed by an underling, and King Wu went so far as to assasinate Zhou (his ruler). After that people began to use strength to subjugate the weak and the power of numbers to castigate the few. From the time of Tang and Wu all hell’s broken loose.

“Now you’re promoting the paths of King Wen and King Wu, putting yourself in charge of all the disagreements in the world, and setting out to teach future generations. Wearing your finely stitched robes and low slung belt, using suggestive words and deceptive actions, casting confusion and doubt to the rulers in the world, and hoping to reach a position of honor and wealth, you’re actually the biggest thief of all. How could anyone in the world not refer to you as Robber Zhong, but instead call me Robber Zhi?

“You sweet talked Zi Lu into following you, making him get rid of his crested hat and discard his long sword in order to receive your teachings. Everyone in the world is going around saying that Kong has the ability to stop violence and rectify injustice. What ended up happening was that when Zi Lu tried to kill the prince of Wei he didn’t succeed. Instead his body was left to putrify hanging from the eastern gate of Wei, so you weren’t even able to teach him a thing.

“You call yourself a talented scholar and sage? Well, you were twice chased out of Lu, had every trace of your presence erased from Wei, were impoverished in Qi, and were surrounded and detained between Chen and Cai. There isn’t a place in the world that can tolerate you. Your teachings are what brought Zi Lu the disaster of being left to putrify. When you use your utmost efforts you can’t assist your own body, and when you use your least efforts you can’t assist anyone else. Of what value is this Dao of yours?

As mentioned by Taiwan writer Long Ying Tai, a moral thinker must choose between rights or wrong base on the thinking of Confucius versus Robber Zhi. But a historian, a philosopher, a literary : those who study the cultures, should not ignore the roles of Robber Zhi. One must always question and study the cultures from every angle.

——————————–
Now a days, I rarely wasting time argue with people about “political correctness” of vision school. In my opinion, whoever promote the idea of Vision school, has little idea about the cultures. Worst, they NEVER and REFUSE to study philosophy in order to think all angles.

Besides politickus, some English educated people give highly regard to the Vision school. However, when digging this people mind below the surface, you will learn that THEY KNOW NOTHING ABOUT CULTURE, NOT EVEN with the English cultures they embrace. What they speak are only a language, with little relation to the earth and their ethnics. Most of them never learn the western philosophy, the substances of western society.

Perhaps this thinking is shape since 1957. Today, I can tell you why Malaysian government strip off Mr Lim Lian Giok citizenship. It is not because he “dis-unite” the people.

Indeed, Mr Lim Lian Geok fates are similar to like Onn Jaafar, Malaysia government and majority of the people feels inferior in front of them. MCA, the so called Chinese representative, know little about Chinese cultures; while the Malay union parties, are inferior to confront their cultural weakness compare to the giant Chinese cultures.

When Lim Lian Giok bring out the idea to “assist” the Malays in cultures, those with inferiority mindset claim him as “cultural chauvinist “. (Similar to Onn Jaafar, where he is being label as Malays ethnics “rights” rebel)

NEP(New Economy policies) are not suppose to be economy base
When making NEP economy base, the political parties, UMNO, MCA, MIC,etc, has failed/refuse to see the real problem. Economy is easy to fix, but cultural inferiority is something deep in the blood.

The 1969 riots has little to do with economy. It is a cultural confrontation! When Tun Dr. Mahathir Muhammand keep saying “Chinese is difficult to assimilate”, he is in the exact 1950 Malay Union parties mindset that reject Onn Jaafar.

If given a chance, I will ask Tun Dr. Mahathir Muhammand and En. Anwar Ibrahim, do you ever think of getting a philosopher in your cabinet? During your administration, did anyone ever enlighten you about Chinese philosophy? Or even better, did you try to study philosophy?

The unnecessary cultural confrontation held in place for almost 50 years. The only way out of the confrontation are not idiotic “visions school” or irrelevant “unity” projects. Indeed, all Malaysian must relearn philosophy of respective cultures. Without philosophy, the people will be blind man sailing on the great sea of cultures.

Vision 2020? If Malaysia refuse to note the importances of cultures and philosophy, shape Malaysia identities through cultural amalgamation, the country is merely landscape.

2 Responses to “只知孔丘,不知盗跖 When one know little confucianism and know nothing about anti-confucianism Robber Zhi”

  1. twilight

    哇,双语喔!

    了解双方的立场后,最重要的是“我的立场是什么?”

    moo_t : 可以说”没有立场“。 这篇文只是为了找出盲点/茫点。 建立新的中心点。

  2. wangyi565

    盗跖古汉语里怎么念没有考证过. 国内现在又开始向民众宣传孔子. 试图重新建立传统道德体系,成功与否需要拭目以待. 但是传统文化应该全面认识,不光要了解孔子和他的儒家体系也应该了解老子庄子墨子,象您这样更能够去了解盗跖,甚至去了解郭解等人才是全面了解传统. 了解了盗跖和郭解等人才可能对民众更了解. 文人治国是有莫大的好处的但也不能不对百姓心存敬畏之心. 我扯远了, 很欣赏您的文章.

    moo_t : 个人认为,老子庄子等比较接近西方的自由主义。 对于许多国家政府来说, 自由主义简直就是洪水猛兽。 通常他们会用“大家长” 的 自由 vs 安全为理由来来否定民众的自主权力。

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s