五二、再與節(jié)克生君書稿

（十二月十一日）

You ask me. "If there is not in the life of Jesus something more note worthy than in the death of Socrates, how are we to account for the fact that the death of Jesus occupies a place so much larger in the thought of the world than the death of Socrates?" "In the thought of the world?" It may be true that in the religious thought of the world, the death of Jesus may occupy an important place. But in the philosophical thought of the world, the death of Socrates surely occupies an equally important—perhaps more important—place as the death of Jesus．The death of Jesus founded a religion; the death of Socrates founded a philosophy. This philosophy has had a tremendous influence upon the Greek and Roman world, and in the modern time upon our own world．The ideal of the modern world is no longer the Christian ideal of self-abnegation, but the Greek ideal of self-development; no longer the Christian ideal of Faith, but the Socratic ideal of Truth-Truth for which Socrates died!…

I admit that to the Christians the death of Jesus does mean a great deal more than the death of Socrates．But why? Because, it seems to me, centuries of powerful tradition have made it so… The difference is due to the traditional training of the believer. It is something purely subjective, and has no objective validity.

You say (in chap. on "he Heroism of Jesus" in "Great pictures as Moral Teachers"—by H. E. Jackson), "With Socrates it was merely the auestion of his own death. With Jesus it was the problem of sin and its forgiveness." That is not true. Socrates, Problem was not merely his own death.

Socrates died for Truth; he sought Truth and found death. He offended the respectable people by calling their conduct and morality into question, by believing that "a life unexamined is not worth living." He was persecuted in the same manner and for the same offence as Jesus was persecuted. Before his death, his friends offered to help him to escape. This he refused. By his death he gave an example to his teaching that "not life, but a good life, is to be valued;" not death, but unrighteousness and lawlessness, is to be avoided.…

Had the Greek people been as religious as the Jews, had Crito, Phaedo, and Plato been as simpleminded as the fishermen of Galilee, han the Socratic teachings emphasized a little more on the supernatural than they did,

—Socraticism would have been a religion, and Socrates would have been a God.…

I do not denv the heroism of Jesus, but I can not belittle the heroism of Socrates.

〔中譯〕

你問我“設(shè)若耶穌之死不比蘇格拉底之死更引人注意，那么對(duì)于耶穌之死比蘇格拉底之死在世人心中占據(jù)更重要的位置，你如何解釋？”“在世人的心中？”還不如說在宗教徒的心中，耶穌之死占據(jù)了一個(gè)更重要的位置來得更確切一些。但在有哲學(xué)頭腦的世人心中，蘇格拉底之死與耶穌之死占有同樣重要的位置——或許前者比后者更重要。耶穌之死建立了一種宗教，而蘇格拉底之死建立了一種哲學(xué)。蘇格拉底哲學(xué)對(duì)于希臘和羅馬世界造成了巨大的影響，這種影響一直延續(xù)至今。現(xiàn)今世界的理想不再是耶教的克己，而是希臘人的揚(yáng)我；不再是耶教的信仰，而是蘇格拉底的真理，蘇格拉底為之奉獻(xiàn)生命的真理！……

我承認(rèn)所有耶教徒都看重耶穌之死而不看重蘇格拉底之死。為什么呢？以余觀之，這是幾個(gè)世紀(jì)積累起來的強(qiáng)大傳統(tǒng)使之然……是信徒們的傳統(tǒng)教育使之然。這純粹是主觀的原因，決沒有半點(diǎn)客觀的真實(shí)性。

你又說（見H．E．節(jié)克生君《倫理教師的大圖像》中《耶穌的英雄主義》一章）“蘇格拉底之死只是他個(gè)人的事，而耶穌之死卻關(guān)系到罪與恕的問題。”這是不確實(shí)的。蘇格拉底之死并不僅僅是他個(gè)人的事。蘇格拉底是為真理而死。他尋找真理，卻找到了死亡。他觸怒了權(quán)貴，因?yàn)樗f他們的行為和道德值得懷疑，因?yàn)樗嘈拧胺墙?jīng)反省的生活是不值過的”。他與耶穌一樣因觸怒權(quán)貴而死，連死法都一樣。在他死前，他的友人提出要幫他逃走，卻遭到拒絕。他曾說過：“賴活不足取，只有不茍活才有價(jià)值。死也不足懼，只有死于不義才可怕。”他身體力行了他的這句話……

設(shè)若希臘人像猶太人一樣信教，設(shè)若克里圖，菲多和柏拉圖如同加利利的漁人一樣頭腦簡(jiǎn)單，設(shè)若蘇格拉底的教義不是注重現(xiàn)世，而是稍稍看重一點(diǎn)來世的話，蘇格拉底主義早就會(huì)成為一種宗教，蘇格拉底也就會(huì)是上帝了……

我并不拒絕耶穌的英雄主義，但是我也無法詆毀蘇格拉底的英雄主義。