American Thinker: The Nazis and Christianity

Christianity had declined severely in Germany at the time the Nazis came to power, which is why the Nazis were able to come to power. 

Many atheists presume that the Nazis were a weird variation of Christianity. I use come from very old books, rather than Wikipedia.  I own these books and the books were written during the very years in which Nazism came to power.  The authors of these books came from a wide variety of perspectives -- Christian, Jewish, atheist, Marxist and the like.  All of the material in this article is replicated in which also has much more specifically researched and footnoted sources for each position.

Christianity had declined severely in Germany at the time the Nazis came to power, which is why the Nazis were able to come to power.  In his book, The Dictators, Richard Overy states that in the decades preceding the First World War Germany was becoming increasingly secular, and that after that war, from 1918 to 1931, 2.4 million Evangelical Christians formally renounced their faith as well as almost half a million Catholics.  In Prussia, only 21% of the population took communion and in Hamburg only five percent of the population took communion.  Before Hitler, German religious leaders were publicly condemning the rise of moral relativism and decline of traditional religious values.

“深入浅出”是一个常用的成语，譬如“张老师讲课总是能够深入浅出，”“这篇文章写的深入浅出，”表示一个复杂的概念或者事物被易于理解的方式解释或者描述。单就字面而言，“深入浅出”意味着“先难后易”的顺序。我们写文章，希望达到“深入浅出”的效果，但自小我的老师就开始教育我“浅入深出”的写作，即“循序渐进，逐步展开”，所谓“山重水复疑无路，柳暗花明又一村”。

想把文章写得“深入浅出”，到底是要遵循“深入浅出”的顺序，还是“浅入深出”的顺序？“深入浅出”意味着开章就要明义，把文章的对象挑明。如果文章的对象不言自明，譬如“吃苹果好处多”，人人知道什么是“吃”，什么是“苹果”，什么是“好处”，以及什么是“多”，这样的写法自然既清楚又简洁。如果文章的对象是“因果性与自我选择效应”，放在第一段，通常人能正确理解的只有一个“与”字。如此一来，这个“义”，“指”是“指”矣，“明”则未必，堪称“深入”。随即“浅出”，逐步解释什么是“因果性”，什么是“自我选择效应”。术语时常是通过术语来解释。为了“自我选择”，又需要使用“差异性与相对优势”，几个回合下来，就成新版圆环套圆环（娱乐城）了。“浅入深出”的顺序恰好反过来。要讲“因果性与自我选择效应”，先从“差异性与相对优势”开始，然后是“自我选择”，继而讲“因果性”，最后点名主旨：“因果性与自我选择效应”。遵循“深入浅出”的顺序，读者从头读到尾，一路不明白，直到最后才谜底揭开，真相大白。没有耐心的读者，这种文章尚未到达真相大白的最后关头，只怕已先往垃圾桶报到了。遵循“浅入深出”的顺序，从头到尾读者倒是都明白，只是不到最后，不知道你到底想干什么，尽说些别人早就晓得的事。碰到没耐心的读者，文章主题还没说出来，估计就先被扔到了垃圾桶。

看来看去，似乎并无两全之策，只能“两害相权取其轻”。“深入浅出”，读者至少模模糊糊知道你要干什么，如果有兴趣，自然会慢慢阅读，没有兴趣，已开始就把文章扔了，节约了时间，对这个社会也是好的。反观“浅入深出”，一些本来对文章所言问题感兴趣的人，因为耐心不够，没能阅读；一些耐心好的，读到最后，发现所讲的问题跟他无关，浪费了时间。如此权衡，要想做到“深入浅出”，还就得按照“深入浅出”的顺序写。

到了美国，参加一个英文写作的培训，总是被教育要使用“深入浅出”的顺序，因为美国人的思维都是所谓线性思维（一根筋？）。 我们古人似乎也是线性思维，后来进化了，才开始七拐八弯，喜耶？悲耶？

Because I am allergic to crabs and shrimps, I rarely try seafood. Last week Chef Wang happened to treat me with her homemade oyster soup. It broke my long-hold illusion on seafood, and stimulated me to have a try by myself. Today I finally made the first bowl of oyster soup, yet its success reminds me how essentially the incredible communication technology has changed our life style.

Actually, I even could not prepared the materials well without the wireless telephone. I could not find the oyster after being back and forth in H-mart's seafood area for a long time. If Chef Wang had not timely instructed me through cell phone to the right place, another frozen food area far away from the seafood area, I would have simply abandoned my ambition. However, it turned out that I bought the wrong type of fishcake, on which I did not ask Chef Wang for advice.

I could not start cooking without the Internet, either. Chef Wang showed me the whole process making the soup, but I only remember the taste when it's my turn to cook. In addition, Chief Wang did not pick up her phone. This time I first reached her husband via MSN, through whom I had the way to contact Chef Wang.

These things, actually, are happening everywhere and every time. People take it for granted instead of feeling amazing when they are talking to each other by Skype in wireless networks. "It is the way it is," we may say. Yet when I call my parents in the rural China, I aware that this world is not as it appear in our eyes.

When I was a child, the only way to get local information was to talk with neighbors face to face. At that time, people frequently visited each other; otherwise you would be block out of the community. This remained the dominant way of communication in my hometown when I left for college to Peking in 1996.

Things started changing since then, and I am lucky to be a witness. The first year in college was full of surprises for a village boy suddenly arrived in a metropolitan of 15 million populations. Even students were using pages and telephones that I thought were only for businessmen; however, cell phones were still far away for college students then. I also bought my only page as a senior searching for a job in 1999 fall, but it was stolen few months latter. I bought my first cell phone in the second month after graduation. At that time, cell phones' prices took a half of my monthly wage and the state-owned duopoly service providers charged heavily, so I compared all types of models and plans before I made the purchase. I was among the first group of my classmates having cell phones, but that privilege lasted only a very short time, just one year later, all my classmates had cell phones. After another one more year, when I returned to campus as a graduate student, most students had equipped with cell phones, while text messages became a most popular way of communication.

Amore startling change happened on Internet. I applied my first Email account when I was a junior. Though my first Email account was free, I also applied another one at pku.edu with an annual fee of ￥100 when I was applying graduate schools in U.S. Except the address was ending with pku.edu, other aspects were disappointing. Its interface was every unfriendly, the capacity was very limited, and it was often out of order. When last year Google was promoting its 2GB free Email account, I recalled up the 1.2GB hard driver of my first PC just 8 years ago, and I felt a little bit dizzy and lost.

通常所指的“宿命论”认为人生一世早有超越的存在做出了安排，我们不过遵命而已，并没有什么自由。这样的“宿命”，完全相信的不会多，完全不信的也少有，绝大多数在半信不信之间。

我这里的“宿命”仅指人一个困境：孤独与死亡。人穷尽所有来回避孤独与死亡，但人的一生，却总是贯穿孤独又终于死亡。这个困境就是我们作为人的“宿命”。

伟大的艺术无一例外的集中在这两个主题。艺术作品要能够被称作伟大，需要经历时间的检验；凡能通过这一检验的艺术作品，必要关乎永恒，因为所谓永恒就是独立于时间；关于永恒的艺术，唯有诉诸于人的恒定本性；而人的恒定本性诸于爱情、牺牲、忠诚等等，无不自于“孤独”与“死亡”。“孤独”与“反孤独”，“死亡”与“面对死亡”构成了人类全部的生存状况。

荷马谱写孤独与死亡的交响乐：阿喀琉思是孤独的，郝克托尔也是孤独的，两个人彼此竞争来避免孤独，而竞争导致了死亡；郝克托尔的死亡，使得阿喀琉思又重新回到了孤独。

瓦尔登湖是关于孤独的cello：一个人索群离居，直面孤独。

红楼梦则是关于孤独的合奏：熙熙攘攘的大家庭里，老祖宗在众人的拥簇下是孤独的，贾宝玉在众人的呵护下也是孤独的，人情练达的薛宝钗是孤独的，多愁善感的林黛玉也是孤独的。

。。。。。。

艺术作品只不过是描述陷在“孤独”与“死亡”困境中人的状态。而圣经创世纪却用寥寥百字讲述了这一困境的根源，从而宣告了人的“宿命”。

1、人是神 用土所造一切活物中唯一有灵的（2:7 耶和华 神用地上的尘土造人，将生气吹在他鼻孔里，他就成了有灵的活人，名叫亚当）；

2、人因为“有灵”而尊贵，神 为他设立伊甸园，并把其他一切被造的活物放置在人的权柄之下（2:15 耶和华 神将那人安置在伊甸园，使他修理，看守。2:19 耶和华 神用土所造成的野地各样走兽和空中各样飞鸟都带到那人面前，看他叫什麽。那人怎样叫各样的活物，那就是他的名字）；

3、人从被造就是孤独的（2:18 耶和华 神说：那人独居不好，我要为他造一个配偶帮助他）；

4、人从被造就满有智慧，因为人能够辨别各种活物的差别并使用一套符号系统来管理这所有的活物（2:20 那人便给一切牲畜和空中飞鸟、野地走兽都起了名；只是那人没有遇见配偶帮助他）；

5、人从被造就是自由的。神 将一切所造的活物带到人面前让他挑一个帮手，人却都不满意（2:20 那人便给一切牲畜和空中飞鸟、野地走兽都起了名；只是那人没有遇见配偶帮助他）；

6、男人爱女人是因为本性中的孤独，而不是因为女人的美德（2:23 那人说：这是我骨中的骨，肉中的肉，可以称他为「女人」，因为他是从「男人」身上取出来的）。

 

在伊甸园中的第一天，人被放在王的尊位，并且摆脱了孤独，因为神 替他造了一个配偶，两人和为一体，没有间隔（2:24 因此，人要离开父母，与妻子连合，二人成为一体。 2:25 当时夫妻二人赤身露体，并不羞耻）。因为永恒神的同在，人也没有必要面对死亡。伊甸园的生活不知道持续了多久，但乐园的生活因为蛇的谎言而终结。

 

7、因为与神 同在，人不在时间里面，也就没有死亡；一旦人背离神 ，人就进入时间，死亡也就不可避免。人吃下辨别善恶树的果子，死亡就开始计时，虽然死亡没有立即来到，但是死亡却已经进入这个世界，并且在那一瞬间就在这个世界掌了权。这是蛇的第一个谎言（3:4 蛇对女人说：「你们不一定死；」）。

8、蛇的第二个谎言与诱惑纠缠在一起。首先，人永远不可能同神 一样。其次，善恶必要与审判相联系，堕落后的人虽然有了判断善恶的爱好，但并没有审判的权柄与能力，从而辨别善恶成了人不可承担的重担。（3:5 因为神知道，你们吃的日子眼睛就明亮了，你们便如神能知道善恶。）

9、人背离了神的同时，人与人的联合就不再能够维持，人开始相互以为羞耻。（3:7 他们二人的眼睛就明亮了，才知道自己是赤身露体，便拿无花果树的叶子为自己编做裙子。）

10、            堕落之后的人开始想尽办法躲避神 。（3:9 耶和华 神呼唤那人，对他说：「你在那里？」 3:10 他说：「我在园中听见你的声音，我就害怕；因为我赤身露体，我便藏了。」）

11、            神 自然知道蛇的诱惑是从女人开始，但神 先责问男人。神 并非需要知道什么，因为没有什么是神 不知道的，神 只是通过一个简单的试炼来宣告人的堕落。（3:11 耶和华说：「谁告诉你赤身露体呢？莫非你吃了我吩咐你不可吃的那树上的果子吗？」）

12、            人在这个简单的试炼中行使了最新获得的能力，并背叛了女人。人首先指责神 ，因为神 造了女人。人忘记了独居时候是不好的，也忘记了刚看见女人时的欣喜，更忘记了是他自己把女人选定为自己的帮手。人或许并没有忘记这些，但是人已经开始学会寻找理由。紧随其后，人就背叛了自己的女人。把堕落的责任推到女人身上，忘记了那女人本是他骨中的骨，肉中的肉。（3:12 那人说：「你所赐给我、与我同居的女人，他把那树上的果子给我，我就吃了。」）

 

人的辩护并没有能力改变神 设定的审判：人失去了乐园，进入死亡的轨道；背叛了女人，重新回到了孤独的状况。“死亡”与“孤独”正是人堕落的后果，成为人堕落后无法挣脱的“宿命”。而在乐园的生活印在人灵魂深处，从此我们无时无刻都在努力摆脱“孤独”与“死亡”，回到那乐园之中。

 

      

One day, I was already old, in the entrance of a public place, a man came up to me. He introduced himself and said: "I have known you for years. Everyone says you were beautiful when you were young, but I want to tell you that you are more beautiful now than then. Rather than your face as a young woman, I prefer your face as it is now. Ravaged."

These are the opening lines of Marguerite Duras' Lover. Thanks to Wang Xiaobo who repeated these lines relentlessly in his influential essays, I can still recall them. Rather than the unspeakable sadness and beauty, I recall them for feeling that I was already old. It's weird to feel in this way when I am just in my twenties. However, whenever a disease, even just a trivial one, has caught you, this feeling sprawls.

Today is the sixth day, and I still cannot stop coughing. The consecutive coughs make me out of breath; the pressure on my lungs makes me so feeble that I just barely keep myself upright. I have to think again and again before I utter a word in order to save some breath.

When the physical condition is normal, we feel comfortable. At that time, strength and energy seem ready at your disposal, the heart is also filled with confidence. We enjoy this condition. If we are sick, we ask doctors to fix us; and once they have fixed it, we will thank the doctor even we have paid a very high price. Yet when we are in our good condition, as in most time we are, we just take it for granted and thank nobody.

Lying in bed, between consecutive coughs, I have to face my limit and start ridiculing myself. I take the health for granted, and want to appeal to myself in this world. Once the health was slightly disturbed, I realize what I took for granted turns out to be the greatest uncertainty. I don't know when I will be sick, how serious it will become and how long it will last.

The Christ teaches us not to worry, since no one can survive even one more minute through worrying. However, when He was preaching this, the omniscience must know that human beings can't stop worrying when what he most cherishes is out of his control.

 

 

Doctor Siu teaches a Sunday school class about Christian Parenting. Partly attributable to his success as a pediatrician, his class is always popular.

The topic of this week is Communication between parents and their children, but it diverts to Discipline as usual at last. Parents seem desperate in disciplining their angels; parent-to-be and parent-in-planning are starting worrying, because all of us have acknowledged that the experience of our parents is definitely out of fashion while our expectation on the quality of our children is soaring with the decreasing of their quantity.

Doctor Sui emphasizes:

1. Children, even as young as 3 years old, are fast learners, so parents should have a consistency on the principles, which children will carry on into their adulthood. So that there should be consistency between parents on the principles as well as consistency in practicing the principles on children. In a word, prevent randomness in everything for children. This theory is at least supported by an interesting experiment on the white mouse. Psychologists put a white mouse in a maze in which they set 3 buttons. Button A, with the white mouse's every touch, releases some food; Button B, no matter how the white mouse touches, does not release anything; Button C, however, releases food randomly when the white mouse touches. The results are that the white mouse never visits Button B after several trials, and just visits Button A when it's hungry, but keeps touching Button C with various methods. The child is just like the white mouse in some aspects. If parents set principles and stick to them, they will learn and get used to them quickly; however, if parents handle them randomly, they will respond their parents like the white mouse in the experiment.

2. The way parents dealing with their own relationship determines the way children getting along with other people, especially for teenagers. I did not pay attention to this part, for it has at least 15 years to go before my children become teenagers.

Doctor Siu's theories on educating very young children are so simple that parents often ignore their importance and efficiency but refer to other tricks. But it's consistent with the recent finding in labor economics.

Several month ago, Heckman, a labor economist of Chicago University and the receptor of Nobel Prize in Economics in 2000, wrote a long article on the editorial page of Wall Street Journal, telling the surprising finding that the education in the very early stage, no later than 7 years old, has the determinative effect on the future of the child. His article calls government on strengthening intervention in the education at this stage.

Doctor Sui's theories are drawn from experience and the modern clinic psychology, while Heckman's finding is derived from the longitudinal surveys developed in recent decades, but they coincide. This coincidence suggests that it should not just interests for academicians, but be really vital to our next generation.

Last night's storm blew down a big tree nearby which cut off the power line, so we fled to a friend's home for dinner.

Chinese enjoy the time at the table, eating and chatting. We talked about the feeling of security and hope. My friend said he would feel secured after gaining the Green Card; I said people had hope about the future in China.

Human being is a unity of contradictions: she desires a secured environment, but she is dreaming of her own adventure too.

Life is so different from adventures, as sleep from dreams. However, people stick to their adventures as they keep dreaming. A life without adventures is as unimaginable as a sleep without dreams.

Chinese graduates in the U.S always face the question of staying here or going home. Hopes are always in company with adventures, so this question, to a certain degree, is another version of "what should I choose between security and adventure?"

I see considerable Chinese post-docs, mainly in bio- and chem- or related fields, working hard in labs for just an H1 visa, which enables them to apply the Green Card, at a price of their careers in China. Because they earned their Ph.D degrees in China not in U.S, it's rare for them to jump off the bottom in the academic system of U.S. I wonder how much the security concern is, so that they are willing to pay this price. From another point of view, they may only postpone a generation of their adventure, since their children usually rise to very high level careers, like Doctors; and for themselves, the adventure from China to the U.S. is more than enough in the whole life.

Taishigongyan:

On this particular question, fortunately, we have a perfect answer: go back china after gaining the Green Card, or attaining citizenship, so we can have a secured adventure.

But it is really sad to hear that, for 20% of the human kind, going home is starting instead of ending an adventure and starting live happily ever after, as the end of every fairy tale. Thus we know fairy tales are just for kids.

柳如是是明朝末年江南名妓。那时候的名妓可能更像时下的著名时尚女名人。她嫁给了一个比她大许多的文化名人钱谦益，当然是作为如夫人，也就是妾。在有明一代，天子以文章取士，文化名人往往身兼大臣与道德家。钱谦益就是这样一个慷慨文字，指摘天下且居高位的人物。用今天的话说就是：有才，有名，有权，当然也有钱，据记载长相也风流儒雅。总之，除年龄大了一点，实在是不二之选。

后来，明朝一下就完蛋了，当时还是半耕半牧的蛮夷坐了龙庭。皇帝换了，官还是要有人当，像钱谦益这样的名人当然是热门人选。

这时候，最谈不上节义的妓女柳女士劝丈夫拒绝蛮族的收买，一死以全节。自古艰难维一死，钱谦益还是去北京当了官（礼部侍郎，一个专门负责社会道德准则建设维系与巩固部门的二把手）。留在江南老家的柳女士或许太年轻，耐不住寂寞，或许还有别的什么原因，和一个年轻人有了绯闻，并被钱谦益的儿子拿住了把柄，关起来等候钱谦益回来发落。

过了些日子，钱谦益不做官了，回乡养老，第一件事就是把柳女士放了，并痛打了儿子一顿。之后，撂下一句话：天下士大夫失节者比比，奈何苛求一女子。

后来柳女士还有些故事，可以在陈寅恪先生晚年所著《柳如是别传》一见。陈先生称中国历史学界300年一人而已（罗家伦语），40岁前已经名动天下，牛津大学教授的位子为他空置了许多许多年，最后耗尽心血，不过替一个300年前的妓女作传，这事情本就有点让人浮想联翩。总之，这位柳女士最后是“葬以夫人礼”，在古代中国，相当不同寻常。

不同的人可以从这个故事读出不同的东西，比如女性一定要加强教育，或者老夫少妻的情况下要体谅妻子通奸，这些且不表，专门来说说“失节”。

首先，中国至少在明朝，知识阶层还是认为“士大夫”（也就是男人，因为士大夫都是男性）的“忠节”重于小女子的“贞节”。

其次，至少明朝的“士大夫”认为在“守节”方面，男人要做女人的模范，男人做不到的是事情，不能苛求女子。

再次，通常男人没有守住自己“忠节”时，并不见得对小女子的“贞节”就没要求了。从后来的发展来，反倒要求越来越厉害。好比男人在外头越是窝囊，越常打老婆。

最后，如果男人不做表率，等女人受了教育，有了想法，还要求她们守这个那个，估计她们不会买账。日本二战后做妓女的很多，中国的大城市现在离婚率（当年离婚对数/当年结婚对数）超过50%，似乎都合这个道理。

中午和陈ageng谈论到国内的“尊孔”运动。如果一个社会的智力活动总是漂浮在最表层，充斥其中的就必然是各种转瞬即逝的冲动。时下的“尊孔”可算为一例。听说同时还有“尊管”（管，即管仲，系中国春秋时期名人，曾在当时的齐国作宰相多年，任期内齐国最富强于中国），估计还会有“尊墨”、“尊老庄”，凡此等等。

人穷则呼天，痛则呼父母。危难绝望之际，人就转向自己的本原处。天地是整个社会整个种族的本原，而父母则是个体的本原。历史也是一个本原，是一个特定群体的本原。任何宗族、民族和国家都自于一系列的共同经历。一个群体的共同经历，就是这个群体的历史。历史不止是出土的死物，而是通过语言、伦理、规范与喜好融合人们的生活之中，把散布在广阔空间与时间里的个体联结起来，成为一个特定的群体，以区别于别的群体。与此同时，一个群体中的个体也通过历史来确定自己所属的群体。整个过程虽悄然无声，却清晰有力，通常并不需要如同搞运动一般来进行。好比人通常不会呼天抢地，喊娘叫爷。当人这样做的时候，必有痛楚。同样，当这个社会开始搞运动一样抢救历史的时候，这个群体也必然正陷于自我联结的困难中：一个群体的定义变得模糊，其中的个体开始疑惑自己是不是属于这个群体或者彷徨于自己属于哪个群体。基于历史的强大惯性，这样的事情很少发生。但是如果遭遇强大的外来力量，历史的趋势剧烈变动，所处其中的人则会相应经历如同撕裂的感觉。与历史越接近，所经历撕裂的痛楚就越强烈，也能越早察觉这种痛楚。当年陈寅恪在王国维追悼会上的评述，正式这个逻辑。陈先生没有明确提出来，这种撕裂最终会传递到整个群体，影响到每一个个体。当这种痛楚散布到整个群体，新的共识与联结却仍然没有能够在这个痛苦中成长出来，这个群体就陷入了一种巨大的危机之中。用通行的术语来说，就是自我身份认同得危机。

中国无疑正是在这样一个自我身份认同的危机之中。一个自诩中央之国的悠久文明，竟然不能为今天的国人提供一个坚强的内心归属，可见我国我族所历变化之剧，所受痛楚之深。同时也可知，我们对应这种变化手法之拙劣，心志之软柔，而成今日之困境。

史可以为鉴。回顾一下历史，看看这变化到底从何而起，我们又迷失在何处？

最自然的起点当然是1840年，因为我们总是这样被教育。可是1840年的国人真正知道自己是谁吗？马褂与旗袍，可笑的辫子，繁复的礼仪，各种满汉隔离的政策。难道那些就是中国？我们现在要回到那样的中国？

或许我们要回到更早。再往前两个世纪的1640年，大明朝已经盖棺，等待最后的埋葬，这个驱逐胡虏恢复中华而立国的王朝再一次极其羞辱的把中国沦丧于胡虏异族之手。300年的太平，换来满地的苍凉；忠孝治天下的陈词，到头来是四起的匪盗，争相投敌的大臣，所执着的不过是弱女子的小脚和那代表贞节的一层薄膜。难道那就是中华？我们要回到那样的中华？或许我们要继续往前追溯，但我们能看到什么呢？从天下为公到一家之天下，从春秋贵族的堂皇之阵到白启项羽的无情杀戮，从百家争鸣到至圣先师，从周武三千田横五百的共荣共死到兔死狗烹之类君君臣臣的反复无常，……

好的，外来的巨大冲击已将一切冲刷个干净，所有的不过是空白上的残桓断埂。再次审视1840年来的变化，我们会惊奇的发现，最彻底的丧失都从最执着的保护开始。当我们执着于SM般变态君臣游戏，终于有激进的前行者彻底放弃了这个2500年的规则；当我们不断执着于中华衣冠礼仪，以抗衡昔日的西方文化，在西方也被视为最激进的思想却用最狂热的方式席卷了所有的古老传统，然后弃之如敝履。

它山之石，可以攻玉。虽然让人难堪，但是与日本的对照仍然是反省这150年得失的捷径。这捷径100年前就为国人中的精英洞悉。再次对比当年两国所作的抉择，我们总归要承认，比较我们的唯唯诺诺，而至进退失据。日本有毒蛇噬手，壮士断腕的坚决明确。“中体西用”的折中所换得的是1895年的屈辱，而“脱亚入欧”的坚忍则见证了1905的光荣。当日最断然的放弃，反倒成就了今日的保存与强壮：菊花的尊荣仍在日本列岛闪耀；漫天的樱花已经每年飞舞在华盛顿将军的方尖碑下，在世界力量的中心展示他们的品质；茶道花道剑道令人窒息的美在整个世界不停展示，禅的神秘也开始在纽约被人追逐。这个过程突兀离奇，险象环生，百年之后尤感惊心动魄，实在是值得研究。（最近有学者回顾那个转折的时代，却让代表最聪明中国青年的MIT大陆学子有机会重演了义和团一般的激扬与不可理喻。100年很长，当年生死交关的抉择，如今正被梦呓一般的胡话论断着，当年面对挑战所作最艰难的决定，也退化成了最轻率的善恶好坏，如同施瓦辛格州长主演的电影；100年也真的很短，当年造成弥天大祸的见识行为，到今天仍无二致，只不过昔年的愚夫愚妇，今天都有了工程学科的学位。）

今天，我们又听到有人“尊孔”。我不知道应该笑还是哭。

历史本身从不会割裂，因为历史总是在那里，且在时间中无情的延续。发生了的永远在那里，没有发生的也就永远没有发生了。被割裂的只是个人。每个人都从历史中习的行事为人的知识，这些知识又植根于生活的现实与需求。当整个生活的现实与需求都因为强烈的冲击改变，人们却不能主动在已有知识的基础上创造出对应挑战的办法，人就在历史中被割裂。因为生活已经是全新的生活，而知识却还是过去的知识。此时，这些知识能带来的只是疑惑彷徨，自我的身份也在这种彷徨疑惑中渐渐迷失。如同从中国到了美国，有些人会主动地调整以适合新的环境，活得很轻松；大部分人则是被事情催促，不得已才改动一下，那种文化的割裂感觉就很强烈。比喻总是不能完全恰当，因为在美国的中国人可以自我认同为中国人。而现今在历史中被割裂的国人，把自己认同为几百年前的中国人则显得可笑了。

过去一百多年，我们已经有了足够多的变化。表面上，今天的衣着已经完全不同于100年前，全然不同的白话文写作规范则推行了将近90年，在大陆地区，新的书写体系也已经推行50年。本质上的变化比表面上发生的还要惊人。

80年前陈寅恪将中国文化，也就是儒家伦理归纳为对五种关系的规定。这五种关系是：君臣、父子、夫妻、兄弟、朋友。这样子的归纳不能保证人人同意，但无疑体现了相当广阔的历史事实，包含了对中国文化的高度洞察。这些关系被视作为社会之维，也就是说，整个社会的秩序就建立在对这些关系的定义上。

今天，又见“尊孔”。我禁不住要问那些奔走“尊孔”的“社会贤达”：你们有没有仔细审视过现实世界中这些关系的演进？有没有问过你们的那些不怎么贤明的普通邻居如何看待这些关系？

现在到什么地方去寻找值得忠诚的君王？莫非是胡主席，我想哪怕最迟钝的人也知道其中的荒谬。

独生子女时代，到什么地方去找兄弟？你如何告诉一个家中的独子应该怎样对待兄弟姐妹？

君臣般的严父孝子恐怕就不仅不会让今天的孩子高兴，也不会让父亲高兴。毕竟孩子已经日益成为一个快乐的源泉而不是一个经济的来源，责任的传递。

至于夫妻，便是最大胆的“尊孔”者，恐怕也不敢合理化那些在妻子不能生儿子的时候取一个小妾的理论？

所有这些历史中形成的知识，都在现实生活中丧失了存在的基础，变成了死的历史，如同春秋战国某个墓葬中的器皿，惟有博物馆才需要它们。想起满清末造，武昌革命，君失其位，天维更张。当时的人们也经历了迷失，也有人出来说要“尊孔”。今天，又听说要“尊孔”。上次“尊孔”怎么样，大家都已经知道了。这回“尊孔”会“尊”成个什么样子，自然需要慢慢等着看，但除开花哨外，想必不会有什么出人意料。