"Things" and "Human Beings" and "The World"

I cannot remember since when, strolling around stalls that sell second-hand stuff has become my most favorite pastime. Places I frequently visited include Sheung Wan where I lived when I was young, Ap Liu Street in Sham Shui Po and the old markets in Tai Po and Yuen Long. Later, when I studied in theUnited States, I often went to flea markets and all sorts of second-hand shops during weekends. Old things thus became part of my life, or even a way that I understand human beings and various matters in the world.

Stalls and shops that sell second-hand stuff are different from antique shops. What they sell are not valuable things. Age determination and genuineness are also out of the question. People who sell old things usually collect daily utensils people dispose of from various channels, whether they are intact or not, and sell them for ten, twenty bucks or even less. As long as there is supply and demand, it is a small business that can make a profit. Clients of these goods come from all walks of life. Grass-root people can buy usable things at bargain prices. Even if they are not new, or even if they are a bit broken, they can meet basic needs in daily life. People who take part in trading these goods also included those who are fond of collecting old things for reasons unknown. They would be delighted for quite a while when they have found something they like. They might believe that this is a destined relationship between human beings and things (or between human beings). I am probably one of these people.

Some years ago, I had the cause to find an old brush. This old thing somehow triggered some thoughts on things, human beings and the world.

In fact, there is nothing special in this old brush. I only thought that the shape of the bamboo handle was succinct and refined. The maker made good use of the curve of the bamboo surface so that the hairs on the brush were more closely spaced. Thus, dust can be brushed away more effectively. I thought it might be used as a reference material for teaching three-dimensional design. So I bought it without too much bargaining.

After I bought the old brush, I had to clean it up a bit. I tried to wipe away the dirt on the handle with a piece of wet cloth. To my surprise, I found a few lines of well-written Chinese characters in small regular script. The characters read: “14th of July in the 27th year of the Republic of China, the 17th day of the Sixth Month in Lunar Calendar” (民國卄七年 七月十四 六月十七日). On the other side, I found nine other characters. They are“天雲置 別人不得取去” which means: “Acquired by Tian Yun. It cannot be taken away by anybody else”.

This minor discovery brought me considerable surprise. An ordinary object was attached with the existence of human beings because of traces left by a person. Moreover, this person is not anybody in the ordinary sense. He (or she) has a name (Tian Yun) and a unique identity. Through this object, it seems that I met Tian Yun somewhere in time and space. By extension, it seems that through the traces of the handiwork left on the object, I met the maker at another time and space – though he (or she) did not leave his or her name. Things prompt the convergence of people.

Martin Heidegger (1889 – 1976), the German philosopher, had made a very in-depth study on the relationship between “human beings” and “things”. In an article titled “The Thing”, he points out that, “They do not appear by means of human making. But neither do they appear without the vigilance of mortals.” (Heidegger, 1971: p. 179). Heidegger takes a jug as an example to illustrate that though this vessel for holding water is being made, it does not appear as a vessel for holding water because it is being made. It does not have the nature of a vessel for holding water because it is being made (p. 166 – 167). One can say that since this thing has the nature of a vessel for holding water, it is definitely made by following the form that fits this nature – that is the sides and the bottom form a void that can hold things. In other words, the nature of having a void (the nothing of the jug) to hold things already exists before the jug is being made.

Let’s imagine, before the technique for making a jug was invented, our ancestors might have discovered that the hollow space of a rock or the ground could hold and store water for drinking. Even though they did not have the intent or way to make anything, there was already awareness and vigilance of the nature of vessels. Under such circumstance, the hollow space of a rock or the ground was appeared as vessels, though it was not yet named. A thing (or the nature of a thing) can only be appeared through vigilance. The subject cannot be separated from human beings. Heidegger intentionally uses the word “mortals” to emphasize the briefness of life and that it is subject to death.

A thing appears as it is, or “the thingness of a thing” in Heidegger’s words. This is originated from the “vigilance” of the things by mortals in their brief lives. Heidegger further points out that, “The first step toward such vigilance is the back from the thinking that merely represents – that is, explains – to the thinking that responds and recalls.” (p. 179). Heidegger thinks that stepping back to the thinking that responds and recalls from the thinking that represents and explains is not only a change in attitude, but an inner “co-responding”, an “appeal to the world’s being by the world’s being, answers within itself to that appeal” (p. 179). Things often reside in the inner co-responding of human beings.

The inner co-responding produced by human beings through things often reflects in the functionality of the things. Functionality often constitutes the nature of things. It is also the basic criteria for awareness and vigilance. For example, a jug (or the hollow of a rock or the ground) can be used to hold water. This function gives it the nature of a vessel that is aware of by human beings. It also causes the continuous response and recall of the thing by human beings in the process of using it. Our ancestors were aware that the hollow of a rock or the ground had the nature of vessel. In another situation, they were aware that clay had the flexibility to be built and formed, and had the characteristic of becoming harder after being fired. Various kinds of awareness and vigilance kept responding and recalling in the limited lives of generation after generation of human beings. They also converge and accumulate as material civilization of human beings (such as the technique of making pottery). In the process of convergence and accumulation, besides actualizing the functionality of the things, the feelings and emotions of human beings (the mortals) aroused on things are also attached.

Let’s go back to the old brush before me. The three Chinese characters “天雲置 Acquired by Tian Yun” (they are apparently larger than other characters) are like a declaration of ownership by the owner – this thing belongs to me, “it cannot be taken away by anybody else”. The vigilance of a thing by a human being and the appearance of a thing in the world not only concern function, but also have love and desire of a human being towards a thing. Among them, various unexpected, perhaps destined relationships are involved.

On that day in the 27th year of the Republic of China (72 years from now), Tian Yun wrote the characters on the brush as a mark. What are being recorded with the merely nine characters included the “love” for the thing and the “desire” of the owner’s owning this thing. No matter whether there was a true reader of these few characters or not, Tian Yun had gone through an inner co-responding. It is an “appeal to the world’s being by the world’s being, answers within itself to that appeal”. However, after all, Tian Yun was merely a mortal. The life of a mortal is brief. When Tian Yun bid farewell to this thing, this thing was no longer owned by Tian Yun. “It cannot be taken away by anybody else” has become a call that is powerless. It can only become part of the history of the thing itself. It can only become the response and recall of the person related to it.

Today, this old brush comes to my possession through destined relationship. It can be said that it is appeared again through my vigilance. But this appearance is not because of its nature and function as a brush. To a very large extent, this thing is appeared because of its nature of being an old thing for responding and recalling. Of course, if it was not bought by me, it might have different appearance under different vigilance by another person.

What I see now is just a brief stay of a thing when it wanders about in the world. This brief stay is still a convergence of the many feelings and emotions of people related to it. Ownership, loss, forgetting and recalling all affect the feelings and emotions of human beings. And all are vigilance of things by human beings. A thing becomes a thing because of the vigilance of a mortal. The world becomes the world because mortals live in it. “Things”, “human beings” and “the world” interact and witness the passage of time together. This may be what Li Bai 李白, a poet in the Tang Dynasty (more than 1,200 years from now), meant in “A Preface to a Banquet at the Garden of Peaches and Plums in a Spring Evening”, “The Heaven and Earth are just a roadhouse for everything; time is just a traveler in a hundred generations. Life is just like a dream. How much happiness can one have?”

Reference:

Heidegger, Martin (1971) The Thing in Poetry, Language, Thought(translated by Hofstadter, Albert).New York: Harper & Row, pp. 163-180.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------「物」與「人」與「世界」

也記不起從甚麼時候開始，逛舊貨攤成為我閒時最愜意的消遣活動。由兒時住處中上環一帶，到深水埗鴨寮街，再而是大埔、元朗的舊墟市；及後，就是在美國唸書期間每逢週末遊走於大大小小的跳蚤市場及二手商店。舊物與舊貨攤，就此成為我生活的一部份，甚或成為我理解世間人事的某種方式。

舊貨攤有異於古董店，賣的一般不是甚麽值錢的東西，也談不上有斷代、真偽等問題。賣舊貨的人大多從不同渠道收集別人遺棄的日用品，不論完整與否，賣得一百幾十以至十元八塊，只要貨源不缺、貨暢其流，也是有利可圖的小生意。買的人就更是林林種種，草根階層以低廉價錢買到合用的物品，即使不是新的，甚至有點破損，也算解決了生活上的基本需要。參與舊物買賣的，還包括一眾不知何故對舊物情有獨鍾的收集者，他們會因為檢到一件心儀的舊物而樂上半天，並相信這是人與物(或是人與人)之間的一份因緣。我，大概也屬於這一類。

多年前，我就有緣檢到一隻舊毛刷，這件舊物亦引發了好些對物、對人、對世界的思考。

其實，這隻舊毛刷也算不上是甚麽特別的東西，當時只覺得竹製的手柄造型簡潔雅緻，製作者更充份利用了竹片的弧面，令植入的刷毛更加緊密，使能更有效地擦走塵垢。我想，這或可作為教授立體造型課的參考資料，也不怎樣討價還價就把它買下來了。舊物買回來後，也得稍作清理，我試着用濕布抹去刷柄上的積垢，卻赫然發現，塵封之下有幾行用毛筆書寫、字體端正的小楷，寫上:「民國卄七年 七月十四 六月十七日」。

反過來清理另一面，再發現九個細字，寫上:「天雲置  別人不得取去」。

這個小小的發現，當下卻帶來相當的震動。一件尋常物件，因人遺下的點點痕跡而托附了人的存在，而且，這不是普遍意義下的任何一個人，是有名字 (「天雲」)、有獨特身份的一個他(或她)。透過這物件，我仿彿與「天雲」於不同時空中相遇。推而廣之，我亦仿彿能透過物件上留下的匠作痕跡，與此物的製作者於另一不同時空中相遇——儘管，他(或她)並沒有留下自己的名字。物，促成了人的交會。

「人」與「物」的關係，德國哲學家海德格爾 Martin Heidegger(1889-1976)探討得非常透徹。他在一篇名為《物》“The Thing” 的文章中指出，「物不因人的製作而顯現，但亦不會在沒有凡人的警覺之下而得以顯現」 “They do not appear by means of human making. But neither do they appear without the vigilance of mortals.”(Heidegger, 1971: p.179) 。海德格爾以陶壺為例，說明此盛水器皿雖然是被製造出來的，但它並不因為被製造而顯現為盛水器皿；並不因為被製造而具有盛水器皿的性質nature (p.166-167)。可以說，此物具有盛水器皿的性質，它就必依循符合這種性質的形制而被製造出來——即由器底與器壁構成一個虛能容物的空間。換句話說，虛能容物的性質，在陶壺作為物被製造出來之前已經存在。

試想，在製陶技術尚未發明之前，人類遠祖可能只是無意中發現天然石塊或地面的低陷處能夠收集及儲存雨水以供飲用，當中並無製作的意圖或方法，但這已經是對盛器的性質之警覺。在這個情况下，石塊或地面的低陷處亦作為盛器而得以顯現。因警覺而使物(或物的性質)得以顯現，主體仍離不開人，海德格爾特意用「凡人」“mortals”這個詞，尤其強調其生命之短暫subject to death。

物之為物而得以顯現，源於凡人在其短暫生命中對物的「警覺」，海德格爾進而指出，「走向警覺的第一步，是從單純描述的思考 - 即解釋 - 中抽身，退到回應與回憶的思考」“The first step toward such vigilance is the back from the thinking that merely represents - that is, explains - to the thinking that responds and recalls.” (p.179)。海德格爾認為，由描述與解釋的思考，退到回應與回憶的思考，並非僅僅一種態度的轉變，而是一種內在的「對應」”co-responding”，是「人作為在世生命發出呼喚的同時，在自身之內回答這種呼喚」 “appeal to the world’s being by the world’s being, answers within itself to that appeal” (p.179)。物，常居於人的內在對應之中。

人透過物而生的內在對應，往往體現於物之功能性functionality上。功能性很多時是構成物之性質；並使人對其有所警覺的基本條件，即如陶壺(或天然石塊、地面的低陷處)可用來盛水，這功能就賦予它作為盛器的性質而被人所警覺，同時亦造就了在使用過程中人對物的不斷回應與回憶。設想，人類遠祖因警覺天然石塊或地面的低陷處有作為盛器的性質；又在另一情境下警覺黏土具有可塑性及其經火燒後會變得更為堅實的特點，種種對物的警覺在一代一代人有限的生命中不斷回應與回憶，並交會、累積成人類的物質文明(如製陶技術) 。在此交會、累積的過程中，除了實現物之功能性外，還托附了人作為在世的有限生命而對物所生的情愫。

話說回來，再看我眼前這隻舊毛刷，「天雲置」三字(字體明顯較其他字為大)，儼然是物主擁有權的宣示——此物為我所有，「別人不得取去」。人對物之警覺；物在世之顯現，除卻功能，就是人對物的一念愛欲之情。當中，又牽涉種種因緣際會。

民國卄七年(距今七十二年)的當日，天雲於毛刷上立字為記，聊聊九個字所記的，是對物之「情」及以此物為一己所有之「欲」，也管不得這幾個字是否有真正的讀者，天雲已然經歷了一重內在的對應，是「作為在世生命發出呼喚的同時，在自身之內回答這種呼喚」。然而，天雲畢竟凡人，凡人的生命畢竟是短暫的，當天雲離此物而去，此物即不再為天雲所有，「別人不得取去」，就變成一種無力的呼喚。它只能成為物件自身歷史的一部份；它只能成為與其相關的人之回應與回憶。

今日，這隻舊毛刷因緣際會流入我的手中，也算是因我的警覺而得以再次顯現，但這次顯現不再因其作為毛刷的性質與功能而顯現，這次顯現，很大程度是因其作為一件能供人回應與回憶的舊物這種性質而得以顯現。當然，假如不是我把它買下，它也有可能因其他人的不同警覺而有不一樣的顯現。

眼前所見，不過是「物」在世流轉的一刻寄寓，但這一刻寄寓，仍交會了很多與其相關的人之諸般感情。擁有、失落、遺忘、追憶，在在牽動人的情愫，亦無一不是人對物的警覺。物，因凡人之警覺而為物；世界，因凡人居於其中而為世界。「物」與「人」與「世界」交互作用，共證時光苒苒。這大概亦是唐代詩人李白(距今一千二百多年)在《春夜宴桃李園序》中所作的嘆謂：「夫天地者，萬物之逆旅；光陰者，百代之過客。而浮生若夢，為歡幾何？」