林巍

日常生活中，人們?nèi)菀装选案弧迸c“貴”相混淆2，如把有錢人家統(tǒng)稱為“富貴之家”。其實(shí)，二者是不同的;富者未必貴，貴者未必富。

隨著中國綜合實(shí)力3的提高，國內(nèi)的富人逐漸多了起來。但他們中不乏這樣的人：住豪宅，卻大放噪音，干擾鄰居;開豪車，可把垃圾從車窗扔到馬路上;到國外旅游，如入無人之境，喧嘩、吵鬧、加塞兒;為自己，一擲千金，捐善款，一毛不拔 …… 。他們雖然富有，卻沒有4半點(diǎn)兒貴族精神，有的只是暴發(fā)戶的俗氣。

對(duì)于貴族精神，可有多種理解5，但幾個(gè)基本要素必不可少：誠信、 擔(dān)當(dāng)6、主見、教養(yǎng)。

誠信的實(shí)質(zhì)是守規(guī)則、重榮譽(yù)7。在春秋時(shí)期的泓水之戰(zhàn)中，宋襄公因恪守規(guī)矩，不乘機(jī)攻打立足未穩(wěn)的楚兵，結(jié)果吃了敗仗，被現(xiàn)代國人譏為“蠢豬8式的仁義”，卻不知其被古代史家所稱頌。歐洲騎士間的戰(zhàn)爭，類似春秋時(shí)代的貴族戰(zhàn)爭，均擺好戰(zhàn)式，堂堂正正地對(duì)攻;搞突然襲擊，對(duì)真正的騎士，是一種恥辱。而紳士間的決斗，更是規(guī)矩在前、動(dòng)作在后;若投機(jī)取勝，則只會(huì)贏得性命而丟失榮譽(yù)，落個(gè)千古罵名，得不償失。所以，境界不同，評(píng)價(jià)各異。

擔(dān)當(dāng)?shù)膶?shí)質(zhì)是社會(huì)責(zé)任、使命感。在中國講的是“修身、齊家、治國、平天下”9，春秋戰(zhàn)國時(shí)，整個(gè)貴族階級(jí)都以執(zhí)戈披甲為榮，視沖鋒陷陣為己任。秦國國君在選擇后嗣時(shí)，首要條件是“擇勇猛者立之”;而楚康王即位五年無戰(zhàn)事，自責(zé)為是莫大的失職10。在歐洲，貴族享有特權(quán)的同時(shí)，意味著擔(dān)當(dāng)特殊的責(zé)任，包括關(guān)鍵時(shí)候挺身而出，為君主、國家獻(xiàn)出生命，而歷次民族戰(zhàn)爭，沖在前面、犧牲最多的是貴族。在西方航海業(yè)有一條不成文的規(guī)定，在船沉沒時(shí)，船長必須最后一個(gè)逃生。英國的威廉和哈里王子，都被送往陸軍軍官學(xué)校受訓(xùn)，畢業(yè)后哈里還被派往阿富汗前線，當(dāng)過機(jī)槍手，以為國家盡職為榮，體現(xiàn)的都是典型的貴族精神。

主見的實(shí)質(zhì)是獨(dú)立思考、高貴人格。他們不會(huì)是“千人之諾諾” 中的一員，卻寧可為“一人之諤諤” 而終。如陳寅恪所評(píng)王國維：“來世不可知也，先生之著述，或有時(shí)而不彰。先生之學(xué)說，或有時(shí)而可商。惟此獨(dú)立之精神，自由之思想，歷千萬祀，與天壤而同久，共三光11而永光”。馬寅初認(rèn)定自己“人口論”12的正確性，在巨大的政治迫害下，仍不“悔罪”。在西方，哥白尼、布魯諾、伽利略不畏教會(huì)的監(jiān)禁、摧殘甚至火刑，誓死捍衛(wèi)“日心說”：“你們可以殺死我，但地球仍在轉(zhuǎn)動(dòng)?！?/p>

教養(yǎng)的實(shí)質(zhì)是文化素質(zhì)、雅致得體13。這些多體現(xiàn)在日常的細(xì)微之中，如孔子的弟子子路，在戰(zhàn)爭中受了重傷，臨死前不忘系好被對(duì)手砍斷的帽纓，“正冠而歿”?？涤袨榈呐畠嚎低?，在上世紀(jì)大批資產(chǎn)階級(jí)的六十年代，赴好友的家庭宴會(huì)，手提包里另藏雅裝14（當(dāng)時(shí)不容在街上穿著），進(jìn)入四合院后，臨時(shí)換裝，也要體面出席。二戰(zhàn)時(shí)，英國國王愛德華到倫敦的貧民窟視察，站在一個(gè)東倒西歪的房子門口，對(duì)里面一貧如洗的老太太問道：“我可以進(jìn)來嗎？”體現(xiàn)的是一種貴族式的對(duì)人尊重。法國大革命中，在巴黎的協(xié)和廣場上，路易十六的皇后不小心踩了劊子手的腳，馬上下意識(shí)地說了句“對(duì)不起，先生”;而臨刑前的皇帝則坦言：“我清白死去。我原諒我的敵人，但愿我的血能平息上帝的怒火。”幾分鐘后15，路易十六及皇后便身首異處。兩個(gè)世紀(jì)后，時(shí)任法國總統(tǒng)的密特朗在紀(jì)念法國大革命200 周年的慶典上真誠宣布：“路易十六是個(gè)好人，把他們處死是件悲劇……”

有貴族精神的人不一定都富有16，有的甚至還很貧窮。陳獨(dú)秀晚年貧困交加，但拒絕接受別人一文錢的饋贈(zèng);俄國著名作家托爾斯泰最后把所有的家產(chǎn)分給了窮人，像流浪漢一樣死在一個(gè)荒蕪的小車站。

在精神層面上，貴而不富者，留下17來的是文明、人道和慷慨;而富而不貴者，可以用大把的金錢18換取有限時(shí)光的享受，卻買不來半點(diǎn)別人發(fā)自心底的尊重。? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? □

In daily life， people often relate wealth to nobility， such as fu gui zhi jia in Chinese or “a family of wealth and nobility”. In fact， the two are not always necessarily associated; in some cases they are two quite different things.

With the growth of overall national strength， more Chinese have become wealthy. Among them， however， are those who make a tremendous noise to annoy neighbors from their luxury homes， or throw out rubbish from the windows of their classy cars， or talk and laugh uproariously and jump queues as if entering an unpeopled land when traveling overseas. While throwing away money like dirt， they donate none like an iron cock… Wealthy they are， what they actually display is nothing more than the air of nouveaux riches， which is totally unrelated to the spirit of nobility.

Speaking of noble spirit， although people may define it differently， there are certain components which are deemed to be essential， such as credibility， commitment， thoughtfulness and upbringing.

To have credibility is to abide by the rules and behave honorably. During Chinas Spring and Autumn Period （770–476 BC）， for example， in the battle of Hongshui， Duke Xiang of Song was defeated by the troops of Chu due to his rigidity in following the “gentlemens agreement” which promised not to attack opponents when they were not ready. The Dukes act， praised by ancient historians， is nevertheless satirized by some people nowadays as asinine ethics. Likewise， wars between European knights were also launched in a dignified and imposing manner， openly confronting one another. Launching a surprise attack would be seen as a disgrace to a genuine knight. In a duel between gentlemen， action had to follow rules， otherwise any win （to save ones life） could only result in indignity， earning eternal infamy， which was utterly not worthwhile. Clearly， things are judged differently by different standards.

By “willingness” is meant to be infused with a sense of mission and social responsibility. Guided by the creed of “cultivating the self， supporting the family， governing the state and ruling the world”， from the Spring and Autumn Period， the Chinese noble class have been proud of charging forward wearing coats of armor， as exemplified in Emperor Qins imperial order to choose his heirs based primarily on their bold and powerful character. It may also be evidenced in Chu Emperor Kangs deep self-accusation over his five-year warless reign （so he had no chance to go into battle to defend his country）. In Europe， the privileged aristocracy were also those who threw themselves into the breach at crucial moments and history has witnessed sacrifices mostly by nobles when their sovereign or country required them. In Western seafaring， there is an unwritten rule that the captain has to be the last to escape when the ship sinks. Princes William and Harry were both sent to military academies for training， and Harry was then dispatched to Afghanistan as a gunner. In this sense， honoring ones national duty typifies a noble spirit.

Thoughtfulness comes with independent thinking by those of noble character. “The blind obedience of thousands is not worth the straightforward advice of one person” is what a noble believes and practices. In commenting on the well-known scholar Wang Guowei （1877–1927）， professor Chen Yinque （1890–1969） said， “Wangs works and theories may remain controversial for quite sometime in the future， but his noble spirit of independence and freedom of thought will mingle with heaven and earth， providing a light for thousands of generations， which will never fade away.” Examples can also be found in these noble characters： Ma Yinchu， a prominent Chinese scholar， never confessed to his “Chinese malthusianism” even under extreme political pressure. In defending their heliocentric theory， western scholars Copernicus， Bruno and Galileo were not afraid of being imprisoned or even burned at the stake by the church： “You can certainly kill me， but the earth is still rotating.”

Upbringing， which embodies cultural quality and decency， is reflected in daily subtleties： Zi Lu， a disciple of Confucius （551–479 BC）， while mortally wounded and on his deathbed， still managed to fasten his toories to have a “decent death”; Kang Tongbi， the daughter of famous reformer Kang Youwei （1858–1927）， attended a family banquet in the 1960s when the “bourgeois life-style” was severely criticized， and hid all her elegant dresses in her bag （since they were not allowed to be worn on the street）; after entering the courtyard she found a “change room” in a corner to make up and appear gorgeous at the party. In Europe， during World War II， the British King Edward visited a shabby slum in London. “May I come in please？” he asked the owner， a poor lady， revealing noble respect for ordinary people. During the French Revolution， in the Place de la Concorde in Paris， a few minutes before their execution， when Queen Marie Antoinette （the wife of Louis XVI） accidentally stepped on the foot of the executioner， she instinctively said “Sorry， Sir” and Emperor Louis XVI then said to the crowd： “I will die as an innocent but I forgive my enemy. May I wish my blood calm the wrath of God.” Two centuries later， President Mitterrand sincerely announced in the General Assembly on the 200th Commemoration of the French Revolution： “Louis XVI was a good man. It was so tragic to kill the couple…”

A man of noble character does not have to be rich; some of them are in fact very poor. Chen Duxiu （1879–1942）， a well-known figure in modern Chinese history， was impoverished in his later days， but he refused to receive a penny from others. Tolstoy， the famous Russian writer， shared out all his possessions to the poor before he died miserably like a beggar in a small deserted railway station.

Evidently， as far as spirituality is concerned， those who are noble but not wealthy are enlightened， humane and generous for generations to come， while those who are wealthy but lack nobility， although enjoying a good （but limited） time of living like a king， can never buy any respect from the bottom of others hearts.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ■