|
再者，每一次你撒謊的時候，你失去了生活上的自由自在的樂趣，因為你得記你所撒的每一個謊言。每一次講真話，你就不必記掛在心；每一次撒謊，你都得去記住那個謊言，因為你在為自己設一個框框，在這個框框之內，你在將來都可能得再去編織謊言去圓那個謊。所以你失去了生活自由自在的樂趣。沒有自由自在的樂趣的生活是什麼樣的一種生活？你因為要去記住每一個謊言而失去生活的自由自在性。你說這是益還是損呢？如此導引討論，你從心理上與實用上都進入到「生活的品質」這一話題。我們也可以以科學手段來探討這一問題，在往後這兩個月裡，將你所說的謊言做個記錄。這一研究的目的在於將所說的謊言，你所得記住的謊言，對你所產生的影響作一匯集。那時，如果你願意將此成果與他人分享的話，我們可以將研究結果與別人的乃至整班同學的結果作一比較，但是，要在一個班上與人做那種程度的分享，需要有相當程度的相互之間的信任。
就個人而言，不講真話，就失去了生活的自在性。你連自己的真面目都已經不認識了，那麼在社會關係層面會有怎樣的結果呢？我會立即問學生：當你知道某人曾經對你撒過謊，你還會完完全全地相信他嗎？每個學生都異口同聲地說「不會」。所以，不講真話，人與人之間的最基本的社會關係就給破壞了。沒有以誠實做為基礎，兩個人之間就不會有任何有意義的溝通的。
對你不誠實的人，你是永遠不會再相信他的，但你也不需直接告訴那個人你已經不再相信他了。我們對別人是這樣，對於自己亦是如此。如果你自己打妄語，你會永遠失去被騙的人的信賴與尊敬。如果你一而再，再而三地不知悔改，長此以往，你就會沒有立足之地，你就無人格可言；沒有人相信你，你也不相信任何人。如果是這樣的話，在今天這種現實社會裡，你將何以處身呢？我們可以從這實用角度，心理學角度，或是科學的角度去分析這個問題。這些角度在生活中隨處可見，不必擺出權威說教。根本無需引入權威的道理。根本不需去說：「你應該做這個、做那個！」。這很自然地就能夠明白的。
實際上將道德教育分解開來，分枝分節地來教不是很理想的一種情況。在道德架構的史深層更深層作為一個整體來教會更有意義，而不是只是在表層上。就從教學而言，道德教育只是一方面；除了教之外還要有一定的溝通。不妄語戒只是五戒之中的一戒，眾德之中的一德，你如果教這一德，你要作一系列相應的處理。有時要學生們讀文學作品；有時要他們讀短篇故事，這些閱讀教材都描述在一種極為矛盾衝突的情形下，要做出一個很困難的決定——「是否要保持誠實」。他們需要讀一些在困難的考驗之下，還需保持誠實的人的故事，和這些人所得到的結果。他們要能從文學的角度來分析討論它。所以這是你所應該採用的一個教法。你應該看看歷史，看看一個有道德的社會與一個無道德的社會，其社會歷史是如何運作的。尤其是就誠實而言：一個誠實與一個不誠實的社會的反彈是什麼？
先放下法律與權威吧！法律與權威只能展現生活中的道德，而不能教道德。如果你是用權威來教道德，那你教的是權威，而不是道德。你在教權威與權力。
道德只能作為一個總體來教。
待續
|
|
Besides, every time you tell a lie, you lose all spontaneity of life because you have to remember every lie. Every time you tell the truth, you don't have to remember it. Every time you tell a lie, you have to remember the lie, because you are setting up a context in which you may have to fabricate something in the future. Thus, you lose the spontaneity of life. Where is the quality of a life without any spontaneity? The spontaneity is gone because you have to remember all your lies. Is that positive or negative? Guiding the discussion in that way, you get to the issue of the quality of life psychologically and pragmatically. We can also investigate this scientifically. Keep a record of the lies you tell over the next two months. This scientific investigation is to collect the lies you have told, the ones you had to remember and the effect that it has on you. Then, if you are willing to share that with someone, we can compare our results with each other or even the entire class. However, it does take a lot of trust in a class to have that level of sharing.
On an indivisual level, by not telling the truth, you are losing all your spontaneity.
You are losing the truth of yourself. Now, what happens in the context of the Dao (Way) of social relations? I would ask the students right away. When anyone has told you a lie, could you ever again totally trust what that person says? And everyone agees, "No." Therefore, by not telling the truth, one breaks the fundamental relationship between two people. There can be no meaningful communication between two people without honesty as its basis.
You can never again trust someone who was not honest with you, but you should never tell that person outright that he no longer has your trust. Well, the same applies to you! If you tell lies, you lose forever the fundamental respect and trust of the people you lie to. And if you accumulate that down the road, then before very long, you have no standing. You have no character. No one trusts you and you don't trust anyone else, so where are you in the pragmatic world of today? We can look at honesty from this pragmatic, psychological and even scientific view, which intersects our entire life without getting into any authority at all. There is no reason to bring authority into it at all. There is no reason to bring "you should do this" up at all. It is totally understandable from within this very nature.
Actually, breaking down virtue-teaching into its components is not very desirable. It makes sense within the totality of its construct at deeper and deeper levels, not only on the surface of it. In terms of teaching it, making the point is one thing, and then there has to be some communication about it. So you take this one thing of honesty, which is one of the Five Precepts, just one aspect of virtue, and you have to deal with it in a series of ways. They have to read literature; they have to read some short stories that show and demonstrate the essential conflict of making a tough decision about honesty. They have to read some examples of people who are faced with difficult problems of having to be honest and what the results are. They have to be able to discuss it in terms of literature. That is one method you have to bring in. You have to look at history, at how history operates within a society that has virtue versus a society that doesn't have virtue and what, especially in terms of honesty, the repercussions are.
Forget law and authority. Law and authority can demonstrate virtue in your life, but can't teach virtue. When you use authority you are not teaching virtue, you are teaching authority. You are teaching power.
Virtue is something that needs to be taught as a total methodology.
To be continued
|
