主題：多勞未必多得
人類自從進入工業社會之後，逐漸喪失了「耐性」的美德。從前在狩獵的時代，獵人要很有耐性地，屏息以待，以免驚動了獵物。到了農業社會，農夫很有耐性地撒種，耕田，等候農作物的成熟。倘若農夫沒有耐性，揠苗助長，結果反而使禾苗枯死。總結這些經驗，舊約【訓道篇】的作者領悟出一個重要的智慧：「事事有時節，天下任何事有定時：生有時，死有時，栽種有時，收割亦有時…」（訓3:1-2）可惜，進入了工業社會，一切著眼「功利」，講求「效率」。「多、快、好、省」是生產的目標；「慢工出細貨」靠邊站。「多勞多得」成了很多人待人處世的座右銘，「知足常樂」成了懶惰的代名詞。「多勞」真的會「多得」嗎？
「功利主義」受歡迎，是因為人傾向「急功近利」，希望立刻看見成果。上星期文憑試放榜，就讓執事我發點兒牢騷罷。考試本身並不是一件壞事。考試給考生一個公認的資格，應徵時可以公平競爭，不必顧慮裙帶關係；老闆在招聘時亦有一個能力的參考指標。另一方面，每個青少年的潛能不同，但為了應付劃一的公開考試，放學後再去補習已成為一種風氣。讀書不再是為了發展潛能、陶冶性情和學習待人接物的道理，而是拿取22分以上的公開考試成績，進入大學。大學畢業後謀一份高薪厚職。中四選科的時候，倫理與宗教科無人問津。2016年的68000考生之中，祗有741人考倫理與宗教科。「德、智、體、群、美」祗是口號，祗是空談。能應付學業的同學，大部份的時間祗是為了操練考試卷，落後的同學祗有放棄，頹廢。學校和補習社，成了製造考試機器的工廠。而大學就成了生產賺錢機器的工廠，造就了不少沒有醫德的醫生、推卸責任的工程師和祗為富有的人訴訟的律師。這是社會的福氣嗎？我認為祗著眼於成本效益，輕視了倫理的訓練，以為是不著邊際，長遠來說，整個社會，得不償失。問題在於社會上大部份的人祗著眼目前的效益，「長遠來說」，太長遠了！
今天的福音，告訴我們以兩姊妹作為代表的，兩個徹然不同，與天主建立關係的方法。兩姊妹同樣愛慕耶穌，但兩人的表達方式不同。福音說，「瑪爾大為伺候耶穌，忙碌不已。」（路10:40）我們可以想像，她打掃地方，她為耶穌倒水流腳，她在廚房煮飯，甚至為耶穌洗滌衣物等…這一切是她所能用來表達對耶穌的愛慕。與她剛好相反，瑪利亞祗是「坐在主的腳前，聽他講話。」（10:39）當瑪爾大向耶穌投訴的時候，耶穌竟然為瑪利亞辯護。讓我們看看瑪爾大的投訴，有何不妥。她說：「主！我的妹妹丟下我一個人伺候，你不介意嗎？」（10:40）
「你不介意嗎？請叫她來幫助我罷！」有甚麼不妥？
相信大家都聽過『愛是不保留』這首歌。這首歌很受歡迎，旋律優美，歌詞感人。可惜，最後一句是整首歌的敗筆！「得主稱讚已足夠！」如果我們所做的一切，是為了得到益處，那管是為了一些不著邊際的益處，我們與世俗的販夫走卒，有甚麼分別呢？你可能會抗議，認為「主的稱讚」是高尚的，與銅臭不同。那麼，請讀一讀「我們不過做了應做的事。」（路17:10）。
表面上，瑪爾大在講事實，瑪利亞的確丟下姊姊一個人伺候耶穌。「你不介意嗎？」瑪爾大明顯想耶穌主持公道。問題是，是否需要全人類一起做同一件事，纔算公平呢？當然不是。不過，最低限度，瑪利亞也不應該祗是坐著，連一個指頭也不動嘛！瑪爾大覺得不公平，因為瑪利亞沒有任何實質建樹。
姑且假設耶穌真的介意。耶穌自然會心裡有數，懂得怎樣處理當前的矛盾，用不著瑪爾大向祂獻計，叫瑪利亞來幫助。正如伯多祿所說，「主！祢知道！」（若21:15）
從耶穌的答案可知，耶穌並不介意瑪利亞不做甚麼實際的行動，祗坐在祂腳前，聽祂說話。耶穌說：「其實需要的惟有一件。」(10:42) 這一件是甚麼呢？是衣食住行，日常生活的必需品嗎？是可以保障生活的金錢和健康嗎？是愛情嗎？是個人尊嚴嗎？是自由嗎？因為有人說，「不自由，毋寧死。」我覺得不是。且聽耶穌跟著說甚麼？祂說：「瑪利亞選擇了更好的一分，是不能從她奪去的。」這更好的一分是甚麼呢？一定不是衣食住行等生活的必須品，一定不是金錢健康，因為瑪利亞祗是坐在耶穌腳前，聽祂說話。是不是愛情、尊嚴或者自由這些不著邊際的東西呢？這裡已經牽涉到一些不能用言語說清楚的課題了。讓我用一首歌，幫助大家領會其中的精神。
我想向大家推薦另一首歌，就是聖詠131首。江文也先生(1910-1983)用舊的翻譯，作了一首名為『天真』的聖詩，收錄在【心頌歌集】。能好像瑪利亞一樣，坐在主耶穌的腳前，凝視耶穌慈悲的面容，聆聽主的真道，這纔是真正的，更好的一分。瑪爾大沒有錯，她以自己的方式，愛慕天主。但她的方式，容易陷入「功利主義」，斤斤計校的弊端，不得不防。
天主保祐！
Sixteenth Ordinary Sunday (Year C)
Theme: More Efforts More Yield? The virtue of "patience" has been vanishing ever since men entered into the stage of industrial society. In hunting societies, hunters had to wait patiently, holding their breath lest the preys would be alarmed. In agricultural societies, farmers sowed the seeds, ploughed the field and waited patiently for the harvest. Had farmers been impatient, pulling up the seedlings which would end up withered. Drawing upon these experiences, the author of Ecclesiastes came up with a piece of wisdom, "For everything there is a season, and a time for every matter under heaven: a time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time to pluck up what is planted;" (Ecclesiastes 3:1-2) However, ever since men entered the Industrial Age, they focused on "utility" and "efficiency". "More, faster, better and saving more" become the criteria for production. Nobody buys "Rome was not built in one day". "More efforts, more yields" has become the motto of modern people and "Rest contented" a synonym of sloth. Does "more efforts" necessarily generate "more yields"?
Utilitarianism is popular because people want quick returns. They want to see instant results. DSE results were released last week. Allow me to grumble for a while. Of itself, examination is not an evil thing. Through examinations, candidates obtain recognition of qualifications. It is fairer in seeking jobs than through personal networks. Bosses can also be assured of the quality of recruits. On the other hand, individual endowment of the young people is different. In order to tackle a uniform public examination, students flock to join extra tuitions after school. Studies no longer develop students' potentials, cultivate their temperaments and learn social skills, but to score 22 plus marks in order to enroll in the universities, hoping to get a high paid job after graduation. Consequently, very few students choose Ethics & Religious Studies in S4. Among the 68000 DSE candidates this year, only 741 sat for E&RS. "Virtue, Intelligence, Physique, Sociability and Æsthetics" are only empty slogans. For more capable students, their time is spent doing past papers. For weaker students, they can only give up and are frustrated. Schools and tuition centres become factories which chuck out examination-taking robots, while universities chuck out money-making machines, physicians who have no integrity, engineers who want no responsibility and barristers who represent only rich people in courts. Is it good for the society? If we only focus on cost-benefit-analysis and ignore ethical training deeming it intangible, the society loses in the long run. The problem is that for most people in this society, who look for instant gratification, "in the long run" is too long for them.
The gospel today tells us of two different approaches, represented by two sisters, to establish relationship with God. Both sisters loved Jesus but they expressed themselves in two different ways. The text reads, "But Martha was distracted with much serving;" (Luke 10:40) We can imagine that she cleansed the house, washed the feet of Jesus, cooked in the kitchen and might even washed clothes for Jesus etc. That was how Martha expressed her love of the Lord. On the contrary, Mary simply "sat at the Lord's feet and listened to his teaching." (10:39) When Martha came to complain, Jesus defended Mary! Let us see what's improper with Martha's complaint. She said, "Lord, do you not care that my sister has left me to serve alone?" (10:40) Superficially, Martha was telling a fact. Indeed, Mary did leave Martha to serve Jesus alone. "Do you not care?" Obviously Martha wanted Jesus to adjudicate. The problem is if it is fair for everybody to do the same thing. Of course not! But at least Mary should not be sitting and moving not even a single finger. Martha thought it unfair because Mary had not done anything tangible.
What's wrong with "Do you not care? Tell her then to help me."
Suppose Jesus cared. Naturally, Jesus had his own idea to resolve the present contradiction. He did not need any instructions from Martha. Just as what Peter said, "Lord, you know!" (John 21:15)
From Jesus' answer, we know that Jesus did not care Mary's not doing anything tangible, that she only sat at his feet, listened to his teaching. Jesus said, "one thing is needful." (10:42) What is this one needful thing? Clothing, food, boarding and transportation etc, those daily necessities? Money and health which guarantee a good life? Love? Personal dignity? Freedom? Because some say, "I would rather die than deprived of freedom". I disagree. Listen to how Jesus continued, "Mary has chosen the good portion, which shall not be taken away from her." What is this good portion? It cannot be daily necessities, nor money; nor health because Mary was just sitting at Jesus' feet and listening to his teaching. Would it be love, dignity or freedom etc. those intangible things? We have come to something which cannot be adequately articulated with words. Let me sing a song to help you appreciate its spirit.
I believe everybody has heard the song "Unreserved Love". This is a popular song. The melody is beautiful and the lyrics touching. Unfortunately, the last verse of the Chinese version spoils it all. "惟望得主稱讚已足夠"which is literally rendered, "My only wish is to receive the Lord's praise. That is enough." If we work for some benefits, whether they are tangible or intangible, how are we different from non-Christian, secular people? You may protest that the Lord's praise is noble and not materialistic. Then, read "we have only done what was our duty." (Luke 17:10)
I would recommend another hymn which is based on Psalm 131. It was written by Mr. Jiang Wen-ye (1910-1983), based on an older translation. The truly good portion is like Mary, sitting at Jesus' feet, gazing his merciful face, listening to his truth. Martha was not wrong. She loved God in her ways, but which could easily fall into the trap of utilitarianism and being calculating. We need to be discerning.
God bless.
No comments:
Post a Comment