《中國人的性格》第四章 講究禮節(jié)

《中國人的性格》是美國傳教士阿瑟·史密斯（明恩溥）基于1872年赴華傳教期間的社會觀察撰寫的著作，首版英文名《Chinese Characteristics》于19世紀(jì)末問世，。作者在華生活逾五十年，書中融合人類學(xué)視角與傳教士立場，記錄了晚清民眾的性格特征與文化形態(tài)。

全書以27個主題章節(jié)剖析中國人行為模式，包含“保全面子”“省吃儉用”等生活哲學(xué)，以及“漠視精確”“因循守舊”等社會現(xiàn)象。通過對比西方工業(yè)文明，著重探討東方特有的生存韌性，如環(huán)境適應(yīng)力與疼痛耐受性。書中案例多源自山東鄉(xiāng)村生活經(jīng)歷，涉及衣食住行、孝悌觀念等主題，部分結(jié)論因宗教立場存在視角爭議。該著作開創(chuàng)西方研究中國國民性先河，被譯成多國文字，成為近代中西文化互鑒的重要文本。

第四章 講究禮節(jié)

值得注意的是，中國人乃至所有東方人的禮節(jié)有兩個角度與我們大為不同——其一是贊賞，另一是批評。我們總喜歡提醒自己，盎格魯撒克遜人有許多優(yōu)秀的品德，而其中最主要的是堅忍不拔，溫文爾雅則并不重要。因此，當(dāng)我們到了東方之后，會發(fā)現(xiàn)有廣闊的亞洲大陸上的居民在處理糾紛、調(diào)節(jié)人際關(guān)系方面，具有比我們靈活得多的技巧。我們內(nèi)心不由得充滿艷羨。這是疏于實干者對于能說會道者的一種羨慕。即使是對中國人最為挑剔的批評家，也不得不承認(rèn)，中國人已經(jīng)把彼此間的禮節(jié)提升到一個完美的境地中。這一境地，是西方人所未知的。且只有親身體驗，必然出乎西方人的意料，并幾乎是他們無可想象的。

我們知悉，中國的典籍上記載有禮儀準(zhǔn)則三百條，行為準(zhǔn)則更是多達三千條。一個民族背負(fù)著如此繁多的禮節(jié)還想生存下去，這似乎是不可想象的。但是，我們很快就發(fā)現(xiàn)，中國人已經(jīng)成功地把恪守禮節(jié)熔鑄成一種與生俱來的內(nèi)在本能，而非外在的需要，就像他們的教育一樣。這個民族的先賢們?yōu)槿藗兊娜粘Ｉ罱煌贫ǔ龇蔽目d節(jié)，而在西方國家，這一切只使用在宮廷和外交往來的過程中。

當(dāng)然，并不是說，中國人的日常生活完全是被這些繁文縟節(jié)所束縛。我們是說，這些規(guī)矩就像節(jié)日的盛裝，到了特定的時候就會被穿戴起來。而中國人全憑一種準(zhǔn)確的本能，去辨認(rèn)什么時候是需要這樣做的恰當(dāng)時機。在這樣的情況下，如果說一個中國人不知道如何才能舉止得體，那么，他就會像西方一個受過教育的人偶爾忘了九九得幾那樣，令人感到荒唐可笑。

西方人之所以對中國人的禮節(jié)不是很欣賞，是因為我們心中懷著一種理念：“禮貌是某種善意的方式，表達出真誠的意愿。”在西方文明中，這一定義的基礎(chǔ)是把理論上的“個人的幸福”看做是“全體人的幸福”，然而在中國，禮節(jié)的意義則是完全與之相反。禮節(jié)就像某種技藝的表演一樣，這些專業(yè)的表演是全部生活技藝的一個重要部分。對人表示禮節(jié)可以不完全是整個內(nèi)心或者頭腦的需要，而只是整個復(fù)雜生活整體中幾個組成部分的需要。

有關(guān)禮節(jié)用語的制定和使用，目的只在于維護目前既有的社會尊卑關(guān)系。這在西方人看來，即便不令人發(fā)瘋，也會令他們頭昏腦漲。可是，在中國人看來，這些用語的使用使得人們的社會等級有了明確的高下之分，而尊卑之分對于保障社會秩序是至關(guān)重要的，而且也是調(diào)解人際關(guān)系的潤滑劑。

有前因就有后果，有后果也有前因，前因和后果共存于同一場合，那么該前的就得前，該后的就得后，各得其所，萬事暢通。就像互相在博弈，下一盤棋，先走的一方必須說：“鄙人的王翼兵先向前走兩格。”隨后，對手則會說：“鄙人的王翼兵也走兩格。”接下來，對手事先告知說：“鄙人王的馬要吃閣下王翼的卒，請趕快把閣下的象向王位動三格。”如此你來我往，直到整盤棋下完。這就是在下棋，一局棋的輸贏，與這些客套的形容詞毫無關(guān)系。但是，正如下棋人不能事先設(shè)想好下一步的出棋，若稀里糊涂地下棋會使自己顯得荒唐可笑一樣，中國人對于對手的每一步棋若不能給予有理有節(jié)的回應(yīng)，也會成為人們的笑柄。因為對中國人來說，客套即是下棋，說不出這些客套的形容詞就等于是無知。

與此同時，中國人講究禮貌的嚴(yán)格程度是有城鄉(xiāng)差別的。在中心城市里，中國人的禮儀是最嚴(yán)格、最正統(tǒng)的。與這些中心城市的距離，會影響到人們恪守禮節(jié)的程度。如果是一個莊稼人，雖然他知道必須有禮貌，但這并不意味著他必須知道像城里人那樣的禮貌有哪些具體要求。

不過，我們必須要承認(rèn)，有極少數(shù)的中國人是不怎么懂在恰當(dāng)?shù)膱龊献袷囟Y節(jié)的。即使如此，他們也要比最有教養(yǎng)的外國人強得多。與他們相比，外國人就像是一個尚未離開襁褓的嬰兒。一般說來，除非這個外國人曾有過長期的生活經(jīng)驗，又比較小心自己有所失禮而被誤認(rèn)為沒有教養(yǎng)，否則，他就不可能有中國人那樣的中規(guī)中矩。很顯然，西方人并不懂那么多的“規(guī)矩”，連中國禮節(jié)最淺顯的門道也難以摸清，即使學(xué)會了那些漂亮的禮貌用語，行為也會表現(xiàn)出那樣的遲鈍與不自然。這點，他們自己也承認(rèn)不諱。也正因為由于外國人在仿效中國人的最起碼的禮節(jié)方面表現(xiàn)出明顯的無能和自愧不如，所以中國的士人們總是帶著一種毫不掩飾的（并自然而然的）輕蔑目光看待這些“夷蠻之人”。

禮節(jié)，就像是一個氣墊子。其實，它的里面可能什么東西都沒有，卻能夠很好地起到緩沖顛簸的作用。與此同時，我還得公正地補充一句，中國人對外國人所表示的禮節(jié)（完全如同與自己的同胞相處時所表示的那樣），更多的是為了急欲顯示自己深諳如何待人接物之道，而不是考慮到客人本身是否感到舒服。你本不想生火燒水沏茶，他卻偏偏執(zhí)意如此；結(jié)果四處彌散的煙火，熏得你淚流滿面。你喝下的那杯茶就好像是一杯苦藥，但是，主人仍然相信自己的這些做法至少表明了他善于待客，倘若客人自己不甚樂意，那完全是客人自己的事。

與之相似的，倘若你在鄉(xiāng)下租了一間較差的房子過宿，房子的主人會覺得他理所當(dāng)然地要為你把房間打掃一下，并（象征性地）布置一下。這一舉止會一直持續(xù)到你已經(jīng)來到了房間，他對你制止打掃的愿望置之一旁，飛揚的灰塵弄得你睜不開眼。你懇求他別做了，但他仍然繼續(xù)做。或許，這就是《禮記》上所教誨的“屋必掃”吧。主人就應(yīng)該為客人打掃房間，不管客人是否樂意。

宴請時也會有同樣的禮節(jié)，這將是令你從未見識過的恐怖（一種過分熱情好客的恐怖）禮節(jié)。在請客吃飯時，熱情的主人特意為你的盤子里盛上一大堆他以為你喜歡吃，或者他認(rèn)為好吃的東西。即使事實上你根本一點不喜歡吃，或者毫無食欲。倘若，你真的一點也不想吃，主人則會說，那就是你的不是了。主人認(rèn)定他自己遵守了東道主之禮，也沒有人會指責(zé)他失禮。如果外國人不懂得這種游戲規(guī)則，那完全是自己事，與主人沒有任何干系。

正是遵循這一原則，一位中國新娘照例前去拜會一位外國夫人時，她特意背朝夫人，向著完全相反的方向行了個禮，結(jié)果弄得女主人感到驚訝和氣惱。事后經(jīng)過詢問才知道，新娘朝北行禮，是因為那是皇帝所在的方向，所以她必須朝北叩拜，而不用在意女主人正坐在房子的南邊。既然這位外國夫人自己不清楚應(yīng)當(dāng)坐在屋子的什么方位時，那么這位新娘也就不必在意女主人坐在哪兒，會怎么想；至少，她表明自己是知道應(yīng)當(dāng)朝什么方向磕頭的！

中國人的禮節(jié)常常表現(xiàn)在送禮這件事上。正如前文所述，送禮是給受禮人“面子”。送禮都有一套固定的程序，所送的禮物有某種固定的老式樣。一位常與中國人交往的外國人總會收到一些外用紅紙包得清清楚楚、內(nèi)裝油膩糕點的禮品盒。這些點心他根本不會吃。但是，即使受禮者反復(fù)表示不能接受，甚至被逼得走投無路表示不愿意接受，送禮人還是不會把禮品拿回去。他最后只得把這些東西全部轉(zhuǎn)送給其他中國人。

中國人的禮節(jié)是決不允許人們對禮物“講究不盡”。送禮的人經(jīng)常會被問到這些禮物花了多少錢。客人到別人家做客，在與男女主人告別時常說這一句公式般的話：“給你們添了不少麻煩，又讓你們破費了！”

一位外國人曾應(yīng)邀參加一次中國婚禮。婚宴上陳列出各式各樣的糕點。婚宴進行到高潮時，端上一盤子糕點，僅有兩三塊，熱氣騰騰而受到夸耀（也許大家都喜歡熱的）。由于那位外國人是貴客，所以這個糕點盤子最先端給了他，而他卻婉言謝絕了。不知是由于什么原因，這件事給正在進行的婚宴投下了一片陰影。那盤子糕點后來沒傳給其他人，而被撤了下去。

原來，按照本地的習(xí)俗，每位參加婚禮的客人都要送上一份禮錢幫襯主人家。按慣例，當(dāng)客人還在席上時就開始直接收錢。但在中國人看來，向客人收禮錢是不禮貌的，于是，就以向客人送熱糕點為托辭。每個在場的中國人都知道送這盤熱糕點的用意，唯獨這位外國人蒙在鼓里，他的拒絕使得其他人不便在當(dāng)時拿出自己的紅包。后來，這位外國人又應(yīng)邀參加這一家舉行的另一次婚宴，這次，這個老外饒有趣味地聽到婚禮司儀這一回比西方人還直截了當(dāng)?shù)貙碣e們宣布：“這是放禮錢的地方，請大家把紅包放這兒來吧！”顯然，是吸取了上次的教訓(xùn)。

我們完全可以把中國人禮節(jié)中令人厭煩的繁文縟節(jié)置之不理，因為那些禮節(jié)的核心無非各種規(guī)矩。但是，我們依然要在社會交往方面向中國人學(xué)習(xí)許多東西。保持我們的誠實，拋棄我們的魯莽，這是完全可能做到的。如果西方人堅定的獨立自主精神，加入一定量的東方人的儒雅，那一切自然將再好不過。

然而，許多西方人似乎永遠不會用這樣的觀點看待事物。筆者的一位熟人在巴黎住了許多年，以至于不知不覺地接受了那個都市里的舉止習(xí)慣。當(dāng)他后來回倫敦居住的時候，他依然按照老習(xí)慣向見到的每一位朋友脫帽鞠躬。有一次，他向一位朋友脫帽鞠躬時，這位朋友極度無情地嘲笑他說：“看清楚了，老朋友，這里可不是你們法國猴子耍把戲的地方！”誰若能夠集東西方之精華于一體，誰能夠安然地走在狹窄的、荊棘叢生的中庸之道上，他就將是幸福的。

英文原版：

Chapter IV. POLITENESS

THERE are two quite different aspects in which the politeness of the Chinese, and of Oriental peoples generally, may be viewed—the one of appreciation, the other of criticism. The Anglo-Saxon, as we are fond of reminding ourselves, has, no doubt, many virtues, and among them is to be found a very large percentage of fortiter in re, but a very small percentage of suaviter in modo. When, therefore, we come to the Orient, and find the vast populations of the immense Asiatic continent so greatly our superiors in the art of lubricating the friction which is sure to arise in the intercourse of man with man, we are filled with that admiration which is the tribute of those who cannot do a thing to those who can do it easily and well. The most bigoted critic of the Chinese is forced to admit that they have brought the practice of politeness to a pitch of perfection which is not only unknown in Western lands, but, previous to experience, is unthought of and almost unimaginable.

The rules of ceremony, we are reminded in the Classics, are three hundred, and the rules of behaviour three thousand. Under such a load as this, it would seem unreasonable to hope for the continuance of a race of human beings, but we very soon discover that the Chinese have contrived to make their ceremonies, as they have made their education, an instinct rather than an acquirement. The genius of this people has made the punctilio, which in Occidental lands is relegated to the use of courts and to the intercourse of diplomatic life, a part of the routine of daily contact with others. We do not mean that in their everyday life the Chinese are bound by such an intricate and complex mass of rules as we have mentioned, but that the code, like a set of holiday clothes, is always to be put on when the occasion for it arises, which happens at certain junctures the occurrence of which the Chinese recognise by an unerring instinct. On such occasions, not to know what to do would be for a Chinese as ridiculous as for an educated man in a Western land not to be able to tell, on occasion, how many nine times nine are.

The difficulty of Occidental appreciation of Chinese politeness is that we have in mind such ideas as are embodied in the definition which affirms that "politeness is real kindness kindly expressed." So it may be in the view of a civilisation which has learned to regard the welfare of one as the welfare of all, but in China politeness is nothing of this sort. It is a ritual of technicalities which, like all technicalities, are important, not as the indices of a state of mind or of heart, but as individual parts of a complex whole. The entire theory and practice of the use of honorific terms, so bewildering, not to say maddening, to the Occidental, is simply that these expressions help to keep in view those fixed relations of graduated superiority which are regarded as essential to the conservation of society. They also serve as lubricating fluids to smooth human intercourse. Each antecedent has its consequent, and each consequent its antecedent, and when both antecedent and consequent are in the proper place, everything goes on well. It is like a game of chess in which the first player observes, "I move my insignificant King's pawn two squares." To which his companion responds, "I move my humble King's pawn in the same manner." His antagonist then announces, " I attack your honourable King's pawn with my contemptible King's knight, to his King's bishop's mean third," and so on through the game. The game is not affected by the employment of the adjectives, but just as the chess-player who should be unable to announce his next move would make himself ridiculous by attempting what he does not understand, so the Chinese who should be ignorant of the proper ceremonial reply to any given move is the laughing-stock of every one, because in the case of the Chinese the adjectives are the game itself, and not to know them is to know nothing.

At the same time, the rigidity of Chinese etiquette varies directly as the distance from the centres at which it is most essential, and when one gets among rustics, though there is the same appreciation of its necessity, there is by no means the familiarity with the detailed requirements which is found in an urban population. But it must at the same time be admitted that there are very few Chinese who do not know the proper thing to be done at a given time, incomparably better than the most cultivated foreigner, who, as compared with them, is a mere infant in arms ; generally, unless he has had a long preliminary experience, filled with secret terror lest he should make a wrong move, and thus betray the superficial nature of his knowledge. It is this evident and self-confessed incapacity to comply with the very alphabet of Chinese ceremonial politeness which makes the educated classes of China look with such undisguised (and not unnatural) contempt on the " Barbarians," who do not understand " the round and the square," and who, even when they have been made acquainted with the beauties of the usages of polite life, manifest such disdainful indifference, as well as such invincible ignorance.

Politeness has been likened to an air-cushion. There is nothing in it, but it eases the jolts wonderfully. At the same time it is only fair to add that the politeness which the Chinese exercises to the foreigner (as well as much of that which he displays to his own people) is oftener prompted by a desire to show that he really understands the proper moves to be made, than by a wish to do that which will be agreeable to his guest. He insists on making a fire which you do not want, in order to steep for you a cup of tea which you detest, and in so doing fills your eyes with smoke, and your throat with a sensation of having swallowed a decoction of marshmallows but the host has at least established the proposition that he knows how a guest ought to be treated, and if the guest is not pleased, so much the worse for the guest. In the same manner the rural host, who thinks it is his duty to have the humble apartment in which you are to be swept and (figuratively) garnished, postpones this process until you have already arrived, and despite your entreaties to desist he will not, though he put your eyes out by raising the dust of ages. The Book of Rites teaches, perhaps, that a room shall be swept, and swept it shall be, whatever the agonies of the traveller in the process. The same rule holds at feasts, those terrors of the uninitiated (and not seldom of too initiated), where the zealous host is particular to pile on your plate the things that it is good for you to like, regardless of the fact that you do not want them and cannot swallow a morsel of them. So much the worse for you, he seems to say, but of one thing he is sure, he will not be lacking in his part. No one shall be able to accuse him of not having made the proper moves at the proper times. If the foreigner does not know the game, that is his own affair, not that of the host.

It was upon this principle that a Chinese bride, whose duty it had become to call upon a foreign lady, deliberately turned her back upon the latter, and made her obeisance towards a totally different quarter, to the amazement and annoyance of her hostess. Upon subsequent inquiry it turned out that the bride had performed her prostration to the north because that is the direction of the abode of the Emperor, no attention being paid to the circumstance that the person to whom the bride was supposed to be paying her respects was on the south side of the room. If the foreign lady did not know enough to take her place on the proper side of the room, the bride did not consider that any concern of hers ; she, at least, would show that she knew in what direction to knock her head!

Chinese politeness often assumes the shape of a gift. This, as already remarked, gives the recipient " face." There are certain stereotyped forms which such offerings take. One who has much to do with the Chinese will be always liable to deposits of packages, neatly tied up in red paper, containing a mass of greasy cakes which he cannot possibly eat, but which the giver will not take back, even though he is informed by the unwilling recipient (driven to extremities) that he shall be obliged to give them all to some other Chinese. Chinese politeness by no means forbids one to " look a gift horse in the mouth." One is often asked how much a present cost him, and guests in taking leave of a host or hostess constantly use the formula : " I have made you much trouble ; I have forced you to spend a great deal!"

A foreigner who had been invited to a wedding, at which bread-cakes are provided in abundance, observed that when the feast was well advanced a tray was produced containing only two or three bread-cakes, which were ostentatiously offered as being hot (if any preferred them so). They were first passed to the foreigner as the guest of honour, who merely declined them with thanks. For some unexplained reason, this seemed to throw a kind of gloom over the proceedings, and the tray was withdrawn without being passed to any one else. It is the custom for each guest at a wedding to contribute a fixed sum towards the expenses of the occasion. It was the usage of this locality to collect these contributions while the guests were still at the table, but as it would not conform to Chinese ideas of propriety to ask a guest for his offering, it was done under the guise of passing him hot biscuit. Every one understood this polite fiction except the ill-informed foreigner, whose refusal rendered it improper for any one else to make his contribution at that time. At a subsequent wedding to which he was invited in the same family, this foreigner was interested in hearing the master of ceremonies, taught by dear experience, remark to the guests with more than Occidental directness, " This is the place for those who have accounts to come in and settle them!"

After all abatements have been made for the tediously minute and often irksome detail of trifles of which Chinese politeness takes account, for all of which it prescribes regulations, it still remains true that we have much to learn from the Chinese in the item of social intercourse. It is quite possible to retain our sincerity without retaining all our brusqueness, and the sturdy independence of the Occident would be all the better for the admixture of a certain amount of Oriental suavity.

There are, however, many Occidentals who could never be brought to look at the matter in this light. An acquaintance of the writer's resided for so many years in Paris that he had unconsciously adopted the manners of that capital. When at length he returned to London, he was in the habit of removing his hat, and making a courteous bow to every friend whom he met. Upon one occasion, one of the latter returned his salutations with the somewhat unsympathetic observation, " See here, old fellow, none of your French monkey tricks here!" Happy the man who is able to combine all that is best in the East and in the West, and who can walk securely along the narrow and often thorny path of the Golden Mean.