給人類最後的信息Last Message to Mankind

by Leo Tolstoy

Bill Lin譯

為第18屆國際和平代表大會而寫，斯德哥爾摩，1909

親愛的弟兄們，

我們聚集在這裡反對戰爭。為了戰爭，地球上所有的國家——成千百萬的人們——把不只是成億的俄國盧布，德國馬克，法國法郎或日圓(佔了他們的勞力的很大部分)，而且還有他們的性命，擺到少數幾個人或有時只有一個人的手中。

現在，我們20幾個平民百姓，從地球不同的各端聚集在這裡，不具任何特權，更重要的，沒有凌駕於任何人之上的權力。我們打算對抗——我們想要對抗，同樣也想要克服——這個不只是一個政府的，而是所有政府的巨大的力量。它們有可支配的巨大的財富，數百千萬的士兵，而且他們非常清楚，那些組成政府的特殊的地位的人，只站立在軍隊上的上面。所以我們想要對抗和廢除的，就是這個軍隊的意義和它的一個目的。

這力量是如此的不對等，要我們去奮鬥，一定看來是瘋狂的。假若我們考慮到我們的對手的爭戰的工具和我們自己的相比，並不是我們的戰鬥意志看來荒繆，而是我們要去跟他爭戰的東西居然還會存在。他們有巨大的金錢和千百萬的服從的士兵；我們只有一樣東西，但那是世界上最有力量的東西——真理。

因此，我們的力量和那些我們的對手們相比，可能看來微不足道，我們的勝利卻像旭日的光輝蓋過了夜晚的黑暗般的肯定。

我們的得勝是確定的，但是只有在一個條件下——在聲言真理時，我們必須說出所有的，沒有妥協、退讓、或修改。真理是如此的簡單，如此的清楚，如此的顯著，如此的不只是基督徒而且是所有有理性的人的責任，所以必須要說出他的通盤意義才能使它成為不可抗拒。

這個真理的通盤意義出自於數千年前(在我們相信是神的律法之中)的幾個字：「你不可殺人。」這真理就是一個人不可以，也不應該在任何情況下，或用任何藉口去殺他的同胞。這個真理是如此的明顯，如此的有約束力，而且是如此的普辨認知，只要清楚的把它擺在人的面前，就可使那邪惡的所謂的戰爭變成非常的不可能。

所以我想，假若我們在這裡出席和平代表大會的人，與其只是清楚又堅定的說出這個真理，讓我們向那些政府發表一些提案來減少戰爭的惡行，或慢慢的降低發生的頻率，我們必須像是手中握有開門鑰匙的人，要試著衝破他們認為是牢不可破的那幾堵牆。

我們面對的是百萬雄兵，一直是越來裝備越精良，訓練得屠殺是越來越快速。我們知道這數百萬的人，絲毫不想殺死他們的同胞，而且絕大部分的，甚至不知道為什麼要被迫去做那令人厭惡的工作，同時他們厭倦了他們需要強制服從的處境；我們知道這些人每一次殺了人，都是來自政府的命令；而且我們知道這些政府的存在，依賴著這些軍隊。

然而，我們這些渴望滅絕戰爭的人，除了去建議這些只藉著軍隊的助力，用戰爭手段的結果賴以生存的政府，難道找不到更有利於我們的目的的方法來摧毀戰爭？我們要去建議這些政府讓他們去摧毀他們自己？

這些政府會樂於聆聽任一這類的演講，知道這種的討論將不會摧毀戰爭，也不會削減他們的權力，只會更有效的遮掩必須遮掩的，假若戰爭和軍隊和他們自己控制著軍隊將繼續的存在。

「但是，」有人告訴我：「這是無政府主義；人們從來不曾生活在沒有政府和國家的情形下，所以為了這些國家的生存，政府和國家和軍事武力保衛他們是必要的。」

但是，先把是否基督徒的生活，和其他國家可能沒有軍隊和戰爭來保衛它們的政府和國家的問題擺在一邊，或者甚至以為，為了他們的福祉它是必要的，所以他們應該盲目的服從這些叫做政府的機構(是由一些他們私下不認識的人組成的)，而且需要付出他們的勞力所得給這些機構，滿足他們所有的要求——包括謀殺他們的鄰人——予取予求；在我們的世上，還有一個尚未解決的難題。

這個困難在於不可能把基督徒的信仰(這是那些從政府來的人特別強調宣稱的)，和由被訓練去殺人的基督徒組成的軍隊取得和諧。無論你再多的區解基督徒的教導，無論你再多的隱藏它的主要原則，它的基本教導就是愛神和愛自己的鄰人；愛神——是最高完善的美德，愛自己的鄰人——是愛人沒有區別。

所以看來無可避免的，我們必須拒絕這二者之一，或是基督教的愛神和愛自己的鄰人，或是國家和它的軍隊和戰爭。

或許基督教的精神會被廢棄，當二選一時——基督教的精神，或愛國和謀殺——我們這個時代的人會判定，國家和謀殺的存在比基督教的精神更重要，我們必須拋棄基督教的精神，只保留重要的：國家和謀殺。

或許就是那樣——至少人們可以做如此的思考和感覺。但是在那個狀況下，他們應該這麼說！他們應該公開承認，我們這個時代的人已經不再相信以往全人類共同智慧所說的，和他們宣稱的神的律法所說的：已經停止相信寫在每個人的內心，不可磨滅的，而現在必須只相信一些不同的人的命令，那些人因為意外或出身而成為皇帝或國王，或藉著不同的陰謀和選舉而變成總統或參議員和國會議員——甚至假若那些命令包括謀殺人。那就是他們應該說的！

但是話不可能這麼說；還有這兩者之一一定得說出來。假若承認基督教的精神禁止殺人，軍隊和政府就變成不可能。而且假如承認政府認同合法的殺人並拒絕基督教，沒有一個人會想服從一個政府，而這個政府只是藉著它的權力去殺人而存在。而且在戰爭裡如果許可殺人，當一個民族在革命裡爭取它的權利時，殺人還是更應該可允許的。所以這些政府，既無法說這一個或那一個，急著把需要解決進退兩難的窘境從主題裡藏起來。然而我們聚在這而要抵抗戰爭的邪惡，假如我們真的達到我們的目的，只需要做一件事：就是把進退維谷的事很清楚地，堅定地同時擺到那些政府派來的人，和構成軍隊的廣大群眾的面前。

要做那件事，我們不只要清楚地，公開地重複這個我們都知道，而且不可能不知道的真理——人不應該殺他的同胞——但是我們必須也清楚地表明，沒有任何考慮能摧毀藉著全世界基督徒的真理所造成的要求。所以我建議，我們這個會議撰寫和發表一個對全人類的呼籲，特別是對基督教國家，在那裡面，我們清楚堅定地表達每一個人都知道的，但是幾乎每一個人都不說的；亦即戰爭並不是——像大多數人認為——一個好的和值得稱道的事，卻像所有的謀殺一樣，它是一個惡劣的犯罪事務，不只是針對那些自願的職業軍人，而且是對那些因為是出於貪婪，或畏懼懲罰而順從的人。

關於那些自願選擇一個軍人生涯的，我要建議清楚堅定地聲明，不要承受那些圍繞在四周的排場、閃光和一般的贊許，它是一個犯罪和羞恥的行為；一個人，他的軍職階級越高，他的工作犯的罪和羞恥也越重。

同樣的，關於那些被弄進軍對服役的人們，或是利誘或是威脅的，我建議要說清楚有關他們犯的大錯——違反了他們的信仰、道德和常理——當他們同意加入軍隊時；違反了他們的信仰，因為當他們加入了謀殺者的行列，和他們所認知的神的律法對立；違反道德，因為為了薪水或畏懼懲罰，他們同意去做他們心裡知道是錯的事情；違反常理，因為假如他們加入了軍隊，而戰爭爆發了，他們可能遭受任何不好的後果，比起他們因為拒絕而遭受的威脅更糟。最重要的是，他們的行為違反常理，因為他們加入了剝奪他們的自由，強迫他們成為士兵的那一種人。

提到了所有的兩種類型，我建議在這個呼籲裡，清楚地表達這思想給真正開明的人，他們沒有迷信於軍事的榮耀，軍事專業和呼召，不承受所有的努力去藏匿它的真正意義，是一個很像劊子手的行業一樣的羞恥或更有過之。這是因為劊子手只是使它自己預備好去殺那些已經被判決是有害的罪犯，而一個士兵卻答應去殺所有他被命令去殺的，即使他們可能是他最親近的，或是最好的人。

一般的人性，尤其是我們基督徒的人性，在它的道德要求和現存的社會秩序已經到了一個如此尖銳矛盾的階段，一個改變已經變得是不能避免的了，一個改變不在社會的道德要求裡，因為道德要求是不能變的，但是在那可以更改的社會秩序裡。被內部的矛盾所激發的對於一個不同的社會秩序的要求，藉著我們的謀殺的準備是如此的清楚的呈現了，一天又一天，一年又一年更加的堅持了。

這個要求改變的張力已經達到了如此的程度，就像有時候，只需要有一個小震動，就能將水變成冰，所以或許只要一個小小的功夫，或甚至一個單字，就改變了我們這個殘酷而不理性的生活——隨著它的軍團，軍備武裝和軍隊——變成一個有理性的生活，符合現代人性的良知。

每一個這樣的努力，每一個這樣的話語，有可能是使寒水瞬間結冰的震動。為什麼我們的聚會，不可能是這個震動呢？

在安徒生Andersen的童話故事裡，當國王走在凱旋遊行裡，經過城裡的街道時，所有的人們都很為他的漂亮的新衣服高興，但一個小孩子說了每個人都知道，卻都沒有說的一句話，改變了每一樣事情。他說：「他沒穿衣服！」整個遊行隊伍亂了，國王變得很羞愧，所有那些曾經自我保證，他們看見了他正穿著漂亮的新衣的那些人，看到了他是裸體的！我們必須也這麼說。我們必須說那個每個人都知道，但是不敢說出來的話。我們必須說那個不管人們會用什麼名堂稱呼的謀殺——謀殺就是謀殺，是個犯罪的，無恥的事情。我們只需要清楚地、堅定地、和大聲地講，就像我們能夠在這裡講的一樣，人們將不會再看到以為他們看到的，將會看到真正發生在他們的眼前的。

他們將不再看到為他們的國家的服役，戰爭的英雄主義，軍隊的榮耀，和愛國主義，卻會看到所存在的：赤裸裸的，謀殺的犯罪事業！

假若人們看到了真相，如同在童話裡相同的事情就會發生：那些做犯罪事情的人將會感到羞愧，那些自我保證沒有看到謀殺的罪行的人，就會看到這罪行，不再去當謀殺犯。

但是，這些國家如何來捍衛自己對抗它們的敵人，它們將如何維持內部的秩序，這些國家沒有軍隊又如何生存呢？

在人們拒絕謀殺以後，他們會採取什麼樣式的生活，我們不知道，也無法知道；但是有一樣是確定的：比起盲目的順從那些安排集體謀殺的人，人們的生活會更自然的遵循他們天賦的理性和良心；從此以後，社會的秩序由那些循著他們自己行為的人的生命來承擔，不是藉著謀殺的威脅下的暴力，卻是藉著理性和良心，不管是任一個情況下，都不會比現在他們過的更糟糕。

那就是全部我所要說的。我應該抱歉，假如它冒犯了任何人，或使任何人傷心，或激起任何不好的感覺。至於我這個80歲的老人，任何時刻都將會死，這會是可恥的而且是有罪的，假若我不說出我所理解的整個真理——這真理，正如我堅定的相信，唯獨這個真理，可以使人類解除因為戰爭所產生的不可估量的不幸。

**************************************************

Written for the 18th International Peace Congress held at Stockholm in 1909.

Dear Brothers,

We have met here to fight against war. For the sake of war, all the nations of the earth –millions and millions of people – place not merely billions of rubles, marks, francs, or yen(representing a very large share of their labor), but also their very lives, at the uncontrolled disposal of a few men, or sometimes only one man.

And now we, a score of private people, are gathered from the various ends of the earth, possessed of no special privileges and above all having no power over anyone. We intend to fight – and as we wish to fight we also wish to conquer – this immense power, not only of one government, but of all governments. They have at their disposal enormous wealth and millions of soldiers, and they are well aware that the exceptional position of those who comprise the governments rests on the army alone. And it is the meaning and a purpose of this army that we wish to fight against and abolish.

It must appear insane for us to struggle as we do, the forces being so unequal. But if we consider our opponent’s means of strife and our own, it is not our intention to fight that will seem absurd, but that the thing we mean to fight still exists. They have enormous wealth and millions of obedient soldiers; we have only one thing, but that is the most powerful thing in the world: Truth.

Therefore, insignificant as our forces may appear in comparison with those of our opponents, our victory is as sure as the victory of the light of the rising sun over the darkness of night.

Our victory is certain, but on one condition only - that when uttering the truth we utter it all, without compromise, concession, or modification. The truth so simple, so clear, so evident, so incumbent not only on Christians but on all reasonable men, that it is only necessary to speak it out in its full significance for it to be irresistible.

The truth in its full meaning lies in what was said thousands of years ago (in the law accepted among us as the Law of God) in four words: "You shall not kill." The truth is that man may not and should not in any circumstances or under any pretext kill his fellow man. The truth is so evident, so binding, and so generally acknowledged, that it is only necessary to put it clearly before men for the evil called war to become quite impossible.

And so I think that if we who are assembled here at this Peace Congress should, instead of clearly and definitely voicing this truth, address ourselves to the governments with various proposals for lessening the evils of war or gradually diminishing its frequency, we should be like men who having in their hand the key to a door, should try to break through walls they know to be too strong for them.

Before us are millions of armed men, ever more and more efficiently armed and trained for more and more rapid slaughter. We know that these millions of people have no wish to kill their fellows and for the most part do not even know why they are forced to do that repulsive work, and that they are weary of their position of subjection and compulsion; we know that the murders committed from time to time by these men are committed by order of the governments; and we know that the existence of the governments depends on the armies.

Can we then who desire the abolition of war, find nothing more conducive to our aim than to propose to the governments which exist only by the aid of armies and consequently by war - measures which would destroy war? Are we to propose to the governments that they should destroy themselves?

The governments will listen willingly to any speeches of that kind, knowing that such discussions will neither destroy war nor undermine their own power, but will only conceal yet more effectively what must be concealed if wars and armies and themselves in control of armies are to continue to exist.

'But', I shall be told, 'this is anarchism; people never have lived without governments and States, and therefore governments and States and military forces defending them are necessary for the existence of nations.'

But leaving aside the question of whether the life of Christian and other nations is possible without armies and wars to defend their governments and States, or even supposing it to be necessary for their welfare that they should slavishly submit to institutions called governments (consisting of people they do not personally know), and that it is necessary to yield up the produce of their labor to these institutions and fulfill all their demands - including the murder of their neighbors - granting them all that, there yet remains in our world an unsolved difficulty.

This difficulty lies in the impossibility of making the Christian faith (which those who form the governments profess with particular emphasis) accord with armies composed of Christians trained to slay. However much you may pervert the Christian teaching, however much you may hide its main principles, its fundamental teaching is the love of God and one's neighbor; of God - that is the highest perfection of virtue, and of one's neighbor - that is all men without distinction.

And therefore it would seem inevitable that we must repudiate one of the two, either Christianity is love of God and one's neighbor, or the State with its armies and wars.

Perhaps Christianity may be obsolete, and when choosing between the two - Christianity and love of the State and murder - the people of our time will conclude that the existence of the State and murder is more important than Christianity, we must forgo Christianity and retain only what is important: the State and murder.

That may be so - at least people may think and feel so. But in that case they should say so! They should openly admit that people in our time have ceased to believe in what the collective wisdom of mankind has said, and what is said by the Law of God they profess: have ceased to believe in what is written indelibly on the heart of each man, and must now believe only in what is ordered by various people who by accident or birth have happened to become emperors and kings, or by various intrigues and elections have become presidents or members of senates and parliaments - even if those orders include murder. That is what they ought to say!

But it is impossible to say it; and yet one of these two things has to be said. If it is admitted that Christianity forbids murder, both armies and governments become impossible. And if it is admitted that government acknowledges the lawfulness of murder and denies Christianity, no one will wish to obey a government that exists merely by its power to kill. And besides, if murder is allowed in war it must be still more allowable when a people seek its rights in a revolution. And therefore the governments, being unable to say either one thing or the other, are anxious to hid from their subjects the necessity of solving the dilemma. And for us who are assembled here to counteract the evil of war, if we really desire to attain our end, only one thing is necessary: namely to put that dilemma quite clearly and definitely both to those who form governments and to the masses of the people who compose the army.

To do that we must not only clearly and openly repeat the truth we all know and cannot help knowing - that man should not slay his fellow man - but we must also make it clear that no considerations can destroy the demand made by the truth on people in the Christian world. Therefore I propose that our Meeting draw up and publish an appeal to all men, and especially to the Christian nations, in which we clearly and definitely express what everybody knows, but hardly anyone says: namely war is not - as most people assume - a good and laudable affair, but that like all murder, it is a vile and criminal business not only for those who voluntarily choose a military career but for those who submit to it from avarice, or fear of punishment.

With regard to those who voluntarily choose a military career, I would propose to state clearly and definitely that not withstanding all the pomp, glitter, and general approval with which it is surrounded, it is a criminal and shameful activity; and that the higher the position a man holds in the military profession the more criminal and shameful his occupation.

In the same way with regard to men of the people who are drawn into military service by bribes or by threats of punishments, I propose to speak clearly about the gross mistake they make - contrary to their faith, morality and common sense - when they consent to enter the army; contrary to their faith because when they enter the ranks of murderers contrary to the Law of God which they acknowledge; contrary to morality , because for pay or from fear of punishment they agreed to what in their souls they know to be wrong; and contrary to common sense, because if they enter the army and war breaks out they risk having to suffer any consequences, bad or worse than those they are threatened with if they refuse. Above all they act contrary to common sense in that they join that caste of people which deprives them of freedom and compels them to be soldiers.

With reference to both classes, I propose in this appeal to clearly express the thought that for men of true enlightenment, who are therefore free from the superstition of military glory, the military profession and calling, not withstanding all the efforts to hide its real meaning, is as shameful a business as the executioner’s and even more so. This is because the executioner only holds himself in readiness to kill those who have been judged to be harmful and criminal, while a soldier promises to kill all who he is told to kill, even though they may be the dearest to him or the best of men.

Humanity in general, and our Christian humanity in particular, has reached a stage of such acute contradiction between its moral demands and the existing social order, that a change has become inevitable, and a change not in society's moral demand which are immutable, but in the social order which can be altered. The demand for a different social order, evoked by that inner contradiction which is so clearly illustrated by our preparations for murder, becomes more and more insistent every year and every day.

The tension which demands that alteration has reached such a degree that, just as sometimes only a slight shock is required to change a liquid into a solid body, so perhaps with a slight effort or even a single word may be needed to change the cruel and irrational life of our time - with its divisions, armaments and armies - into a reasonable life in keeping with the consciousness of contemporary humanity.

Every such effort, every such word, may be the shock which will instantly solidify the super cooled liquid. Why should not our gathering be the shock?

In Andersen's fairy tale, when the King went in triumphal procession through the streets of the town and all the people were delighted with his beautiful new clothes, a word from a child who said what everybody knew but had not said, changed everything. He said: 'He has nothing on!' and the spell was broken, and the king became ashamed and all those who had been assuring themselves that they saw him wearing beautiful new clothes perceived that he was naked! We must say the same. We must say what everybody knows but does not venture to say. We must say that by whatever name people may call murder - murder always remains murder and a criminal and shameful thing. And it is only necessary to say that clearly, definitely, and loudly, as we can say it here, and men will cease to see what they thought they saw, and will see what is really before their eyes.

They will cease to see the service for their country, the heroism of war, military glory, and patriotism, and will see what exists: the naked, criminal business of murder!

And if people see that, the same thing will happen as in the fairy tale: those who do the criminal thing will feel ashamed, and those who assure themselves that they do not see the criminality of murder will perceive it and cease to be murderers.

But how will nations defend themselves against their enemies, how will they maintain internal order, and how can nations live without an army?

What form of life men will take after they repudiate murder we do not and cannot know; but one thing is certain: that it is more natural for men to be guided by reason and conscience with which they are endowed, than to submit slavishly to people who arrange wholesale murders; and that therefrom the form of social order assumed by the lives of those who are guided in their actions not by violence based on threats of murder, but by reason and conscience, will in any case be no worse than that under which they now live.

That is all I want to say. I shall be sorry if it offends or grieves anyone or evokes any ill feeling. But for me, a man eighty years old, expecting to die at any moment, it would be shameful and criminal not to speak out the whole truth as I understand it - the truth which, as I firmly believe, is alone capable of relieving mankind from the incalculable ills produced by war.