《中国人的性格》第四章 讲究礼节

《中国人的性格》是美国传教士阿瑟·史密斯（明恩溥）基于1872年赴华传教期间的社会观察撰写的著作，首版英文名《Chinese Characteristics》于19世纪末问世，。作者在华生活逾五十年，书中融合人类学视角与传教士立场，记录了晚清民众的性格特征与文化形态。

全书以27个主题章节剖析中国人行为模式，包含“保全面子”“省吃俭用”等生活哲学，以及“漠视精确”“因循守旧”等社会现象。通过对比西方工业文明，着重探讨东方特有的生存韧性，如环境适应力与疼痛耐受性。书中案例多源自山东乡村生活经历，涉及衣食住行、孝悌观念等主题，部分结论因宗教立场存在视角争议。该著作开创西方研究中国国民性先河，被译成多国文字，成为近代中西文化互鉴的重要文本。

第四章 讲究礼节

值得注意的是，中国人乃至所有东方人的礼节有两个角度与我们大为不同——其一是赞赏，另一是批评。我们总喜欢提醒自己，盎格鲁撒克逊人有许多优秀的品德，而其中最主要的是坚忍不拔，温文尔雅则并不重要。因此，当我们到了东方之后，会发现有广阔的亚洲大陆上的居民在处理纠纷、调节人际关系方面，具有比我们灵活得多的技巧。我们内心不由得充满艳羡。这是疏于实干者对于能说会道者的一种羡慕。即使是对中国人最为挑剔的批评家，也不得不承认，中国人已经把彼此间的礼节提升到一个完美的境地中。这一境地，是西方人所未知的。且只有亲身体验，必然出乎西方人的意料，并几乎是他们无可想象的。

我们知悉，中国的典籍上记载有礼仪准则三百条，行为准则更是多达三千条。一个民族背负着如此繁多的礼节还想生存下去，这似乎是不可想象的。但是，我们很快就发现，中国人已经成功地把恪守礼节熔铸成一种与生俱来的内在本能，而非外在的需要，就像他们的教育一样。这个民族的先贤们为人们的日常生活交往制定出繁文缛节，而在西方国家，这一切只使用在宫廷和外交往来的过程中。

当然，并不是说，中国人的日常生活完全是被这些繁文缛节所束缚。我们是说，这些规矩就像节日的盛装，到了特定的时候就会被穿戴起来。而中国人全凭一种准确的本能，去辨认什么时候是需要这样做的恰当时机。在这样的情况下，如果说一个中国人不知道如何才能举止得体，那么，他就会像西方一个受过教育的人偶尔忘了九九得几那样，令人感到荒唐可笑。

西方人之所以对中国人的礼节不是很欣赏，是因为我们心中怀着一种理念：“礼貌是某种善意的方式，表达出真诚的意愿。”在西方文明中，这一定义的基础是把理论上的“个人的幸福”看做是“全体人的幸福”，然而在中国，礼节的意义则是完全与之相反。礼节就像某种技艺的表演一样，这些专业的表演是全部生活技艺的一个重要部分。对人表示礼节可以不完全是整个内心或者头脑的需要，而只是整个复杂生活整体中几个组成部分的需要。

有关礼节用语的制定和使用，目的只在于维护目前既有的社会尊卑关系。这在西方人看来，即便不令人发疯，也会令他们头昏脑涨。可是，在中国人看来，这些用语的使用使得人们的社会等级有了明确的高下之分，而尊卑之分对于保障社会秩序是至关重要的，而且也是调解人际关系的润滑剂。

有前因就有后果，有后果也有前因，前因和后果共存于同一场合，那么该前的就得前，该后的就得后，各得其所，万事畅通。就像互相在博弈，下一盘棋，先走的一方必须说：“鄙人的王翼兵先向前走两格。”随后，对手则会说：“鄙人的王翼兵也走两格。”接下来，对手事先告知说：“鄙人王的马要吃阁下王翼的卒，请赶快把阁下的象向王位动三格。”如此你来我往，直到整盘棋下完。这就是在下棋，一局棋的输赢，与这些客套的形容词毫无关系。但是，正如下棋人不能事先设想好下一步的出棋，若稀里糊涂地下棋会使自己显得荒唐可笑一样，中国人对于对手的每一步棋若不能给予有理有节的回应，也会成为人们的笑柄。因为对中国人来说，客套即是下棋，说不出这些客套的形容词就等于是无知。

与此同时，中国人讲究礼貌的严格程度是有城乡差别的。在中心城市里，中国人的礼仪是最严格、最正统的。与这些中心城市的距离，会影响到人们恪守礼节的程度。如果是一个庄稼人，虽然他知道必须有礼貌，但这并不意味着他必须知道像城里人那样的礼貌有哪些具体要求。

不过，我们必须要承认，有极少数的中国人是不怎么懂在恰当的场合遵守礼节的。即使如此，他们也要比最有教养的外国人强得多。与他们相比，外国人就像是一个尚未离开襁褓的婴儿。一般说来，除非这个外国人曾有过长期的生活经验，又比较小心自己有所失礼而被误认为没有教养，否则，他就不可能有中国人那样的中规中矩。很显然，西方人并不懂那么多的“规矩”，连中国礼节最浅显的门道也难以摸清，即使学会了那些漂亮的礼貌用语，行为也会表现出那样的迟钝与不自然。这点，他们自己也承认不讳。也正因为由于外国人在仿效中国人的最起码的礼节方面表现出明显的无能和自愧不如，所以中国的士人们总是带着一种毫不掩饰的（并自然而然的）轻蔑目光看待这些“夷蛮之人”。

礼节，就像是一个气垫子。其实，它的里面可能什么东西都没有，却能够很好地起到缓冲颠簸的作用。与此同时，我还得公正地补充一句，中国人对外国人所表示的礼节（完全如同与自己的同胞相处时所表示的那样），更多的是为了急欲显示自己深谙如何待人接物之道，而不是考虑到客人本身是否感到舒服。你本不想生火烧水沏茶，他却偏偏执意如此；结果四处弥散的烟火，熏得你泪流满面。你喝下的那杯茶就好像是一杯苦药，但是，主人仍然相信自己的这些做法至少表明了他善于待客，倘若客人自己不甚乐意，那完全是客人自己的事。

与之相似的，倘若你在乡下租了一间较差的房子过宿，房子的主人会觉得他理所当然地要为你把房间打扫一下，并（象征性地）布置一下。这一举止会一直持续到你已经来到了房间，他对你制止打扫的愿望置之一旁，飞扬的灰尘弄得你睁不开眼。你恳求他别做了，但他仍然继续做。或许，这就是《礼记》上所教诲的“屋必扫”吧。主人就应该为客人打扫房间，不管客人是否乐意。

宴请时也会有同样的礼节，这将是令你从未见识过的恐怖（一种过分热情好客的恐怖）礼节。在请客吃饭时，热情的主人特意为你的盘子里盛上一大堆他以为你喜欢吃，或者他认为好吃的东西。即使事实上你根本一点不喜欢吃，或者毫无食欲。倘若，你真的一点也不想吃，主人则会说，那就是你的不是了。主人认定他自己遵守了东道主之礼，也没有人会指责他失礼。如果外国人不懂得这种游戏规则，那完全是自己事，与主人没有任何干系。

正是遵循这一原则，一位中国新娘照例前去拜会一位外国夫人时，她特意背朝夫人，向着完全相反的方向行了个礼，结果弄得女主人感到惊讶和气恼。事后经过询问才知道，新娘朝北行礼，是因为那是皇帝所在的方向，所以她必须朝北叩拜，而不用在意女主人正坐在房子的南边。既然这位外国夫人自己不清楚应当坐在屋子的什么方位时，那么这位新娘也就不必在意女主人坐在哪儿，会怎么想；至少，她表明自己是知道应当朝什么方向磕头的！

中国人的礼节常常表现在送礼这件事上。正如前文所述，送礼是给受礼人“面子”。送礼都有一套固定的程序，所送的礼物有某种固定的老式样。一位常与中国人交往的外国人总会收到一些外用红纸包得清清楚楚、内装油腻糕点的礼品盒。这些点心他根本不会吃。但是，即使受礼者反复表示不能接受，甚至被逼得走投无路表示不愿意接受，送礼人还是不会把礼品拿回去。他最后只得把这些东西全部转送给其他中国人。

中国人的礼节是决不允许人们对礼物“讲究不尽”。送礼的人经常会被问到这些礼物花了多少钱。客人到别人家做客，在与男女主人告别时常说这一句公式般的话：“给你们添了不少麻烦，又让你们破费了！”

一位外国人曾应邀参加一次中国婚礼。婚宴上陈列出各式各样的糕点。婚宴进行到高潮时，端上一盘子糕点，仅有两三块，热气腾腾而受到夸耀（也许大家都喜欢热的）。由于那位外国人是贵客，所以这个糕点盘子最先端给了他，而他却婉言谢绝了。不知是由于什么原因，这件事给正在进行的婚宴投下了一片阴影。那盘子糕点后来没传给其他人，而被撤了下去。

原来，按照本地的习俗，每位参加婚礼的客人都要送上一份礼钱帮衬主人家。按惯例，当客人还在席上时就开始直接收钱。但在中国人看来，向客人收礼钱是不礼貌的，于是，就以向客人送热糕点为托辞。每个在场的中国人都知道送这盘热糕点的用意，唯独这位外国人蒙在鼓里，他的拒绝使得其他人不便在当时拿出自己的红包。后来，这位外国人又应邀参加这一家举行的另一次婚宴，这次，这个老外饶有趣味地听到婚礼司仪这一回比西方人还直截了当地对来宾们宣布：“这是放礼钱的地方，请大家把红包放这儿来吧！”显然，是吸取了上次的教训。

我们完全可以把中国人礼节中令人厌烦的繁文缛节置之不理，因为那些礼节的核心无非各种规矩。但是，我们依然要在社会交往方面向中国人学习许多东西。保持我们的诚实，抛弃我们的鲁莽，这是完全可能做到的。如果西方人坚定的独立自主精神，加入一定量的东方人的儒雅，那一切自然将再好不过。

然而，许多西方人似乎永远不会用这样的观点看待事物。笔者的一位熟人在巴黎住了许多年，以至于不知不觉地接受了那个都市里的举止习惯。当他后来回伦敦居住的时候，他依然按照老习惯向见到的每一位朋友脱帽鞠躬。有一次，他向一位朋友脱帽鞠躬时，这位朋友极度无情地嘲笑他说：“看清楚了，老朋友，这里可不是你们法国猴子耍把戏的地方！”谁若能够集东西方之精华于一体，谁能够安然地走在狭窄的、荆棘丛生的中庸之道上，他就将是幸福的。

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.