神亡怪夢

標籤: 天馬行空, 道士

在胡思亂想的夜晚﹐越打越長﹐心想﹐任由自己放縱一下﹐寫篇滔滔不絕的爛文(真長進)﹔再想﹐做下間隔﹐寫篇牆紙﹐也是種樂趣。這幾天﹐在了無邊際地在尋找﹐想為個沒答案的問題劃個總括。回憶自己以為懂得一切的十來歲時光真的幸福﹐不像現在成了這個摸不著知識邊界的可憐蟲﹐為了無關痛癢的問題去苦惱。哈﹐可能連問題的本身是什麼還未能搞得清清楚楚﹐又怎會找到答案。找到一個答案﹐也只怕會牽起更多的問題。最初原始有人﹐我想﹐解決三餐一宿已佔了大半時間﹐到物質稍為富庶﹐閒下來的人才有時間去胡思亂想。食物過盈﹐產了肥婆。時間過盈﹐成了哲學家﹔閒適的靈知已深入說過這點。

Alice sighed wearily. "I think you might do something better with the time," she said, "than wasting it in asking riddles that have no answers."
"If you knew Time as well as I do," said the Hatter, "you wouldn't talk about wasting it. It's a him."
"I don't know what you mean," said Alice.
"Of course you don't!" the Hatter said tossing his head contemptuously. "I dare say you never even spoke to Time!"
"Perhaps not," Alice cautiously replied; "but I know I have to beat time when I learn music."
"Ah! That accounts for it," said the Hatter. "He won't stand beating. Now, if you only kept on good terms with him, he'd do almost anything you liked with the clock. For instance, suppose it were nine o'clock in the morning, just time to begin lessons: you'd only have to whisper a hint to Time, and round goes the clock in a twinkling! Half-past one, time for dinner!' " (Alice in Wonderland)

Sir Ernest Gombrich (art historian)寫過﹐實在的世界﹐是由不重複的旋動印像構成的混亂。"is a chaos of swirling impressions that never repeat themselves" (Gombrich 1959:45)。我們每刻﹐在千千萬萬接收的聲和光影中﹐選擇了怎樣去看世界。就算兩個人在經歷著同一件事﹐接收到的訊息﹐中間經過腦袋的運作﹐和反射出來的結果也必有不同。當然﹐同樣地﹐兩人遇了不同的經歷﹐反而產生接近的思想訊號﹐又何嘗不可? 人﹐靠著這類外在因素去界定事物﹐單單想起"蛋"﹐我們便要知硬殼﹐蛋白/黃等因素...但又如在女性母體內的卵﹐明明也是蛋﹐性質和形象就相差很遠﹐孕育下代的細胞。想起了令Descarte 認為不能以經驗來判斷物質的"蠟"。人類用著語言和文字﹐去成為溝通這些不同經歷的渠道。互相去為複雜的現實找尋結構和解釋﹐去為這些經歷訂立程式﹐把新事物分析﹑歸類。人要界定較複雜的事物﹐和表明更深刻的道理﹐中間便要訂立很多指針﹐去把一切事物連結起來。有些事物﹐如石﹑水﹐我們只要向實物指指﹐別人就會明白。你去到任何地方﹐譬如說要買支水﹐只要指一指﹐對方也用手指比劃一下價錢﹐有很多指針已可表達到事情發展的方向。但對於思想概念﹐一句"自由民主社會"就死得啦﹐你試想想﹐點解釋比個五歲知這個概念是什麼? 中間要多少指針方可完滿解釋連結這道理? 我想其實很多成年人也只以為知道這概念﹐可是隨便找兩個人﹐再問問二人"自由民主社會"是什麼﹐就不會得到一樣的答案。如果兩人要深入討論任何話題﹐大前題就是對那話題的基礎思想大家也要有接近的指針﹐方有一個有效的思想溝通。

"Just look along the road, and tell me if you can see either of them."
"I see nobody on the road," says Alice.
"I only wish I had such eyes," the king remarked in a fretful tone. "To be able to see Nobody! And at that distance too! Why it's as much as I can do to see real people, by this light!..."

... "Who did you pass on the road?" the king went on, holding out his hand to the Messenger for some hay.
"Nobody," said the messenger.
"Quite right," said the king: "this young lady saw him too. So of course Nobody walks slower than you."
"I do my best," the messenger said in a sullen tone. "I'm sure nobody walks much faster than I do!"
"He can't do that," said the king, "or else he'd have been here first." (Through the looking glass)

因此社會就是從這些溝通之間訂立起來﹐由指向一草一木﹐至所有思想系統的運作﹐也要靠著新的界定和導向。如果世界只得二人存在﹐既可能大家同意世間一切的稱呼和系統﹐也可大家各自各把物件命名自己喜歡的名字。我懷疑也因此﹐神要在三個人之中才能存在﹐因為任何事物﹐有一人動議﹐必定也要一人附和﹐佔了多數(最少2/3)﹐就成為大家所能認證之事﹐是任何社會係統的最基本的單位。三人完全同意的事便變了真理﹐而三人不能有任何同意者則成未可知之事。神﹐就是這個系統的延續﹐因此神也會老﹐也會死﹐也會隨著時間去改變(*1)﹐亦隨著時間以另一個形態重生。

*1: MAN has created gods in his own likeness and being himself mortal he has naturally supposed his creatures to be in the same sad predicament. Thus the Greenlanders believed that a wind could kill their most powerful god, and that he would certainly die if he touched a dog. When they heard of the Christian God, they kept asking if he never died, and being informed that he did not, they were much surprised, and said that he must be a very great god indeed. In answer to the enquiries of Colonel Dodge, a North American Indian stated that the world was made by the Great Spirit. Being asked which Great Spirit he meant, the good one or the bad one, “Oh, neither of them,” replied he, “the Great Spirit that made the world is dead long ago. He could not possibly have lived as long as this.” A tribe in the Philippine Islands told the Spanish conquerors that the grave of the Creator was upon the top of Mount Cabunian. Heitsi-eibib, a god or divine hero of the Hottentots, died several times and came to life again. His graves are generally to be met with in narrow defiles between mountains. When the Hottentots pass one of them, they throw a stone on it for good luck, sometimes muttering, “Give us plenty of cattle.” The grave of Zeus, the great god of Greece, was shown to visitors in Crete as late as about the beginning of our era. The body of Dionysus was buried at Delphi beside the golden statue of Apollo, and his tomb bore the inscription, “Here lies Dionysus dead, the son of Semele.” According to one account, Apollo himself was buried at Delphi; for Pythagoras is said to have carved an inscription on his tomb, setting forth how the god had been killed by the python and buried under the tripod.
The great gods of Egypt themselves were not exempt from the common lot. They too grew old and died. But when at a later time the discovery of the art of embalming gave a new lease of life to the souls of the dead by preserving their bodies for an indefinite time from corruption, the deities were permitted to share the benefit of an invention which held out to gods as well as to men a reasonable hope of immortality. Every province then had the tomb and mummy of its dead god. The mummy of Osiris was to be seen at Mendes; Thinis boasted of the mummy of Anhouri; and Heliopolis rejoiced in the possession of that of Toumou. The high gods of Babylon also, though they appeared to their worshippers only in dreams and visions, were conceived to be human in their bodily shape, human in their passions, and human in their fate; for like men they were born into the world, and like men they loved and fought and died.
"Sir James George Frazer (1854–1941). The Golden Bough. 1922. XXIV. The Killing of the Divine King § 1. The Mortality of the Gods "

在上次探訪倉兄時﹐我粗略聽了他的一套理論﹐那翻大道理﹐分開來說﹐我很多也能認同﹐可是﹐合在一起﹐我想﹐我還未能完全聽得明白﹐甚至對之抱著極其懷疑的態度。不單對我想的事構不了幫助﹐結果反而越想越遠﹐越想越亂。我想﹐如果我沒理解錯誤﹐這便是我相對的看法:「智慧和肉體也是有著自己的界限的。思想和精神雖活於過去﹐亦可自由透過語言文字而穿梭時空﹔不過肉體的存在卻是這一刻﹐沒有這刻的存在﹐所有思想將不可構成﹐理念和實質始終有別﹐而離身軀之說則不可知。 空間要做成能量轉換需要由外界注入大量能源﹐可分化而不可回聚﹐故有宇宙擴張論﹐要改變也是能量的交換而非精神的操控﹐我相信不是種可逆轉操控的能量。當然﹐也許﹐亦是我俗身未能參破天外玄機。」

"That is not quite right," said the Caterpillar. "Not quite right, I'm afraid," said Alice, timidly: "some of the words have got altered."
"It is wrong from beginning to end," said the caterpillar; and there was silence for some minutes. (AW)

說起什麼聚會﹐什麼煮酒﹐嘻﹐其實到不到也不成問題﹐橫豎也只是瘋子的聚會。我也想著﹐對客人無禮﹐到底是主人的問題﹐還是客人的問題? 甚麼的客人﹐才該用窟頭掃把打走? 自己呢? 自己如果發謬論﹐又是否該伸自己一腳?

The table was a large one, but the three were all crowded together at one corner of it: "No room! No room!" they cried out when they saw Alice coming. "There's plenty of room!" said Alice indignantly, and she sat down in a large arm-chair at one end of the table.
"Have some wine," the March Hare said in an encouraging tone.
Alice looked all round the table, but there was nothing on it but tea. "I don't see any wine," she remarked.
"There isn't any," said the March Hare.
"Then it wasn't very civil of you to offer it," said Alice angrily.
"It wasn't very civil of you to sit down without being invited," said the March Hare.
"I didn't know it was your table," said Alice; "it's laid for a great many more than three."

寫到這裡﹐無錯﹐連一開始的問題還未說到﹐結果﹐還是不寫了﹐也厭倦了。人由生下的一刻便要開始放棄﹐要不斷在世上放棄沒能力捉緊的事物﹐要放棄自己天資不足的範籌。不斷做出選擇﹐在眾多道路中也只許行一條﹐像如果選擇出了freeway exit﹐便很大機會難以走回頭。如Heraclitus 說﹐你不可能兩次踏入同樣的河﹐所有經驗﹐也是全新的經驗。"Ποταμοῖς τοῖς αὐτοῖς ἐμβαίνομέν τε καὶ οὐκ ἐμβαίνομεν, εἶμέν τε καὶ οὐκ εἶμεν. We both step and do not step in the same rivers. We are and are not." 在這寬闊的河﹐能遇也緣﹐能愛也緣﹐能恨也緣﹐所以對著布甸的廢話也可成對話。

It spoke in a thick, suety sort of voice, and Alice hadn't a word to say in reply: she could only sit and look at it and gasp.
"Make a remark," said the Red Queen: "it's ridiculous to leave all the conversation to the pudding!"

看得到這裡的人﹐送多你幾句:

"But I don't want to go among mad people," Alice remarked.
"Oh, you can't help that," said the Cat: "We're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad."
"How do you know I'm mad?" said Alice.
"You must be," said the Cat, "or you wouldn't have come here." (AW)