https://www.kinghungip.net
☆ 藤農線上書籍 ☆

1-34 「發誓當食生菜」增添皮肉之苦

        在鴉片戰爭中擔任英國主力蒸汽軍艦Nemesis艦長的William Hutcheon Hall和船員William Dallas Bernard其後就鴉片戰爭以及他們在中國的見聞合寫了兩本書,其中一本於1844年出版的名為" Narrative of the Voyages and Services of the Nemesis from 1840 to 1843; and of the Combined Naval and Military Operations in China: Comprising a Complete Account of the Colony of Hong Kong, and Remarks on the Character and Habits of the Chinese",裏面有不少值得一讀的觀察。
        其中一個觀察是中國人的殘忍行為。作者慨歎:
        「表面看來,是文明的,社會秩序一派井然、莊嚴,滿口親其親子其子,看了這些你也多少會以為這必是個快快樂樂的禮義之邦。加上你又看到他們那些精巧的器具,看到他們那樣努力、合力建造而成的讓人讚嘆的工程、樓房、運河、堤岸等等,你也多少會以為他們的制度裏面必有其可觀者 … … 但,只要你再稍看一下表層之下的,看到滿目是野蠻、殘忍的事,與你最初的印象大有抵觸,當驚訝不已。官吏使用酷刑倒不是那樣讓人驚奇 … … 因為中國並無宣誓之事,也沒有 死後賞罰的觀念,以致有時除了用刑逼供之外,別無其他提取證據的方法。但更加費解的是,為甚麼他們花上那麼多心思 ,用種種讓人噁心的方法把人折磨至死。」
        (”Civilization appears to float upon the sur-face; you observe so much of social order and sobriety, and hear so much of paternal care and filial obedience, that you are half inclined to think they must be a very moral, humane,and happy people. Again, you witness such proofs of ingenuity, such striking results of industry and of combination of labour in their public works and buildings, canals, embank-ments, & etc., that you are inclined to believe their insitutions must have something good in them at bottom... But, when you look a little deeper below the surface, you are astonished at the many evidences of barbarism and cruelty which militate against your first impressions. The use of torture in the hands of government officers is less striking... because, the obligation of an oath being unknown in China, as well as a future state of reward or punishment, there is in some cases no other mode of extracting evidence than this cruel, unjust, and much-abused instrument of violence, It is more difficult, however, to perceive why they should have exerted their ingenuity to produce revolting cruelty in their modes of inflicting death.”)
        作者提到中國並無宣誓,其實中國是有中國自己的宣誓方法的,如歃血為誓,指天為誓,對着山、海發誓的山盟海誓等等,但正如歷史學者Paul R Katz 博士指出(見Divine Justice:Judicial Rituals and Legitimation Processes in Chinese Legal),中國不一而足的發誓方式並沒有被納入為司法程序的一部份,對此,他頗覺奇怪。我則認為,西方國家法庭上的宣誓儀式乃主要建基於基督教這文化之上,也就是說,宣誓這儀式,只能在篤行一神論,並有死後賞罰的觀念,而且民眾普遍認真對待這宗教,普遍在意人對神的忠誠這種文化背景之下才較有意義,否則,像中國那樣主要信奉多神論、泛神論、無神論、唯物論的文化,宣誓,就如說 「牙齒當金使」那樣具戲劇性吧。
        因此,當清末民初外交家兼法學博士伍廷芳(1842-1922)和清末法學家沈家本(1840-1913)等人嘗試把宣誓引進中國的法庭時,最終由於鍚良和林紹年等人反對而被否決,反對理由就是他們不相信宣誓可以促使證人講真話。而我估計,錫良和林紹年等人更實在的反對理由可能是,他們自己都是發假誓的專家,以己度人,怎會相信中國人發誓呢?恰如美國來華傳教士明思溥(Arthur Henderson Smith 1845-1932)在中國活了四十多年後說”Nobody trusts anybody else in China, for the excellent reason that he knows that under similar circumstances he could not be trusted himself”在中國,任何人都不會信人,原因當然是每個人都會設身處地想,換作當事人是他自已,別人也不會信他。」的確,從《詩經》的「信誓旦旦,不思其反,反是不思,亦已焉哉!」到廣東人說的「發誓當食生菜」,從孫子兵法的 「兵不厭詐」,到李鴻章出賣戈登將軍(General Charles Gordon 1833-1885)到毛澤東的引蛇出洞,中國人不把發誓當一回事確是有案可稽的。
        也由於西方的法庭宣誓建基於基督教這文化之上,最初法庭只接受教徒宣誓,後來才容許非教徒宣誓,因為既然不相信這宗教,則即使手按聖經發誓,在良心上也難受制約,因此,當英國於十九世紀中葉佔領並開始管治香港,把英國法庭的宣誓傳統移植到香港時,就極其困難,無計可施之下,當局只好讓華人在法庭上以斬雞頭、摔瓦缽、燒黃紙等中國式毒誓以代替手按聖經發誓。但資料顯示,那時香港華人作假證供(perjury)情況嚴重,令英國殖民者的司法當局非常頭痛。但英國人始終較文明,依然對中國人循循善誘,沒有像中國衙門那樣以炮烙夾棍侍候。中國人為自己長期未能建立起嚴肅的信仰系統吃了多少虧,受了多少皮開肉綻之苦啊。

(本文摘錄自鍾祖康原著"中国,你憑甚麼?")    ★版權為著者所有★