Face of a Crashing Skin: Wu Hongsen's Essays and Prose Collection

Author: Wu Hongsen
Publisher:
Publishing Date: 2004-01-01
Features: What is the root of this? First, human instinct is to seek profit and avoid harm. Second, the way to seek profit and avoid harm is through imitation from others who possess. Normally speaking, breaking the rules and violating regulations should be punished, while adhering to order and rules should be encouraged—at least not disadvantaged. This is under normal circumstances. But once society becomes abnormal, honest and law-abiding people suffer, while those who dare to break the rules reap great benefits. Especially when the status of rule-breakers is higher than that of the general public, their is also greater, and at this point, they set an example for the public that triggers admiration and longing for rule-breaking. Particularly when more law-abiding citizens are in a clear disadvantageous position, forcing them to regret their law-abiding behavior, a natural urge to break the rules and hatred towards those who benefit from breaking the rules emerge to balance their mentality. But the public is usually a disorganized mass, weak and powerless, and their urge to break the rules is difficult to truly satisfy, so they can only seek substitute satisfactions. Simply put, it's like stealing some drinking water. Our society is gradually sliding into a abyss where honest people suffer and cunning individuals thrive. This makes the public's urge to break the rules and hatred accumulate even more. If you ask what the greatest instable factors in society are, this is it. Such emotional energy, once exploited by some politicians or religious figures to find a "just" outlet for release, can be disastrous. How can this dangerous energy be or transformed into healthy driving force for social progress? To truly achieve equality before the law. Enforce the rules strictly, and severely punish any who dare to break them to serve as a deterrent. In recent years, numerous major,, and super-large corruption cases have been exposed, some officials executed, but corruption has not decreased, and the deterrent effect seems to have failed. This shows that the efforts and scope of anti-corruption have been far insufficient. Only when corruption is pushed to the point where officials tremble at the mere mention of it can it truly serve as a measure. Not only is the of anti-corruption insufficient, but in recent years, some media outlets have occasionally appeared with bizarre justifications for corruption, claiming it is a lubricant for the transition from a planned economy to a market economy. Now that corruption is rampant, have we truly entered a market economy? While open justifications for corruption have become less common, theories that indirectly defend rule-breaking and criminal behavior still surface. For example, in the October 2000 issue of Caijing magazine, an article titled "The Dark of Funds" analyzed the large-scale trading records of 22 fund portfolios from 10 domestic fund management companies on the Shanghai Stock Exchange between August 9, 1999, and April 28, 2000, exposing numerous violations and illegal operations. After the article was published, the renowned economist Wu Jinglian was interviewed by CCTV and Southern Weekly, strongly stating that the stock market cannot be too corrupt and that institutional crimes in the securities market must be held accountable. However, the China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSC), as the main regulatory body of the securities market, and the judicial authorities remained silent. After some time, someone finally spoke. Instead of clearly stating that institutional crimes in the securities market should be investigated and punished, they defended the fund crimes. Below is a segment of his speech at the "China Securities Market in the Context of Opening Up" seminar held in Shanghai on November 2: "Some of the problems in the current fund market are actually related to the development level of the market and may not be entirely the fault of fund management companies. In fact, if there were a mature market with 15,000 funds, due to competition and the breadth and depth of the market itself, the so-called 'fund characteristics' would not be an issue." Attributing fund crimes to the insufficient number of funds is such a and illogical justification for criminal behavior. This kind of defense can also be considered a characteristic of China. What would the victims of these crimes think upon hearing such a speech? As for how to the energy of the urge to break the rules, I have so far only discussed the aspect of strict law enforcement. I previously mentioned that the best method is to transform this energy into a healthy driving force for social progress. What kind of method is this? To be honest, I don't know. Perhaps in the process of interpreting one's own dreams, there are always blind spots. So, I shifted my focus to another angle to answer the question raised at the end of the dream, namely, where did the snake's body go? Common sense would tell us that seriously answering a question in a dream is absurd. But I found that the question raised by the dream is very similar to Zen koans, such as: "When will the snow fill the well?" "When you clap both hands, what is the sound of one hand?" "Where were you when your parents didn't know each other?" Zen disciples seek answers to life's various puzzles when they join a master. However, the master only poses a question, a koan, for them to solve. The disciples sit in meditation, facing the master or a wall, pondering deeply—this is the main form of Zen practice. So, what role do these koans play? This has always been a mystery to me. Since the question raised by my dream is the same as a koan, solving this question would also unveil the mystery of Zen and understand its profundity. With this thought, I gained renewed determination. Although I didn't sit facing a wall or meditate in a lotus position like a Zen disciple, I sat at my desk for days, straining my brain to find the answer. But I achieved nothing. I had to admit that this was a question that could not be answered in four-dimensional space. Is there a higher-dimensional space? If there is, we could see the snake's body, which disappears in four-dimensional space, and easily understand the mysteries of the world. For example, an insect with only two-dimensional spatial perception, which moves on a plane and seeks food, suddenly has a hand reach down from the air and grab the food. It would be utterly bewildered, not knowing what happened, because it cannot perceive three-dimensional space. Similarly, humans living in higher-dimensional space see us as we see insects with only two-dimensional perception. Human wisdom is nothing in the face of such beings. The vast libraries of books—so-called crystallizations of knowledge—would be nothing more than the trail of slime left by a snail crawling in the eyes of such a creature. Plato was the first Western philosopher to speculate about the existence of another realm of existence. He said that the truth we know is merely the projection of the light outside the cave into the cave. The Chinese philosopher Zhuangzi also recognized the relativity and limitations of cognition. He said: "The morning fungus does not know the passage of time, and the cricket does not know the seasons." (The fungus that lives for only one day does not know what a month is, and the cricket that lives for only a few months does not know what a year is.) If I could exist in a higher-dimensional space, how wonderful that would be! In such a space, I could observe humanity as I observe an ant colony under tree roots. When I woke up from this fantasy, I realized that under the pressure of the difficult problem, I had unknowingly imagined myself as God. This made me realize that I had been too arrogant to solve a problem that only God could solve. No wonder I was trapped in frustration and confusion. However, I had not been aware of this arrogance beforehand. I had overestimated human intellect, believing that with intelligence, any problem could be solved—it was just a matter of time. My in intellect made me unconsciously take on the role of God, carrying a burden that only God could bear, without ever realizing that there are certain problems that human intellect cannot solve at all. At this realization, a flash of white light passed before my forehead, as if I had suddenly understood the mysteries of Zen. Zen disciples abandon secular life and enter the Buddhist monasteries, often because of inner frustrations they cannot escape, hoping that the purification of the monasteries will free their souls. They believe that the path to liberation from frustration is to find answers, and these answers are found in the masters or Buddhist scriptures. But after entering, the master asks, "What is in your hand?" The disciple answers based on common sense: "A stick." The master says, "No, think again." Every answer the disciple gives, the master says, "No, think again." The disciple cannot think of anything and tries to stay in the room without seeing the master. The master is not accommodating and orders some disciples to carry him to the meditation room to continue answering. Cornered, he feels as if he would rather die than live, but he does not want to die, and his spiritual problems are not solved. He still holds onto the hope of receiving the master's guidance. The Chinese Zhuangzi also expressed similar views in the form of a story, though I am too lazy to look up the exact quote. The infinitude of culture leads to another characteristic that distinguishes humans from animals: humans are indeterminate, becoming animals full of possibilities, constantly evolving. Since human existence is one of infinite possibilities, we have no reason to hold either optimistic or pessimistic attitudes toward humans. Each generation strives to realize the best possibilities of humanity, though we are aware that history has shown that the worst possibilities are often realized among them. Compared to animal instincts, another difference between humans and animals is that animal instincts can be inherited, but human culture cannot. Humans must acquire culture through deliberate learning or environmental assimilation. Therefore, humans are also the "learning animals" of culture. Precisely because culture cannot be inherited, every generation must learn, which determines that humans can never escape the of survival. Also, because culture must be learned, it leads to a long period of nurturing. Humans already have will and self-awareness from a young age, but they only take on the responsibility of survival many years later. Thus, there is a nurturing bond between humans and their parents, and when humans realize they were raised by others, they feel psychologically indebted to their parents. This makes human life seem like a rental, and from the moment of birth, it is as if a contract to rent life is signed. Although one cries out upon entering the world, seemingly unwilling to sign this contract, one has no choice. Therefore, the goal of human life is to repay the debt and pay interest, preferably even creating profitable profits. That is to say, to use this rented life to create value greater than life itself, so that one can die without regret. Thus, life is not the most precious thing; using life to gain value greater than or at least equal to life is what is truly precious. Precisely because human life has such a purpose, it appears precious. What humans fear most is that life is wasted, unable to repay the debt and pay interest, making it difficult to die in peace. As long as humans realize they cannot die without regret, they will fear death and do everything in their power to avoid it.