보행결輔行訣의 내용은 탕액경湯液經에서 왔고, 보행결의 이론은 황제내경에 기반하고 있으므로, 탕액경은 황제내경과 무관하다고 할 수 없다.
陶弘景：證明張仲景學過《內經》
필자: 肖相如頻道（ID：xiaoxiangru0011)，
有人認為，張仲景的學術是經方體系，是源於《神農本草經》和《湯液經》，而與《內經》無關；
並認為張仲景的學術與《內經》有關的證據隻有其原序中提到的“撰用《素問》、《九卷》”的文字，而在《傷寒論》中從未提到過《內經》的文句。
昨天我從仲景《傷寒論》的診療理論證偽瞭這個命題，今天再從《輔行訣臟腑用藥法要》的角度來看看仲景是否學習過《內經》。
一
《輔行訣臟腑用藥法要》（簡稱《輔行訣》）為南朝陶弘景所著，據其所載：“商有聖相伊尹，撰《湯液經法》三（十二卷），為方亦三百六十首。
上品上藥，為服食補益方者，百二十首；中品中藥，為療疾祛邪之方，亦百二十首；下品毒藥，為殺蟲辟邪癰疽等方，亦百二十首。
凡共三百六十首也。實萬代醫家之規范，蒼生護命之大寶也。今檢錄常情需用者六十首，備山中預防災疾用耳”。
晉皇甫謐《甲乙經序》謂：“伊尹以亞聖之才，撰用《神農本草》以為《湯液》……仲景論廣《伊尹湯液》為十數卷，用之多驗。近代太醫令王叔和撰次仲景遺論甚精，皆可施用”。
宋林億《傷寒論序》雲：“夫《傷寒論》蓋祖述大聖人之意，諸家莫其倫擬，故晉皇甫謐序甲乙經雲：伊尹以元聖之才，撰用《神農本草》以為《湯液》，漢張仲景論廣《伊尹湯液》為十數卷，用之多驗。
近代太醫令王叔和撰次仲景遺論甚精，皆可施用。是仲景本伊尹之法，伊尹本神農之經，得不謂祖述大聖人之意乎？”
若果如上述，則其正確的關系應為，《湯液經》源於《神農本草經》，《傷寒論》和《輔行訣》均源於《湯液經》。
二
現在《湯液經》已不可得見，但《傷寒論》和《輔行訣》已經被整理出來瞭，《傷寒論》和《輔行訣》秉承的應該是《湯液經》的學術體系。
如果這一前提成立，則從《傷寒論》和《輔行訣》的實際內容可以判斷其學術體系和《內經》是否有關。
由於《傷寒論》是中醫必讀必學的經典，流傳也很廣泛，大家可以自己去判斷其與《內經》在學術上的關系，也可以參考我昨日推送的文章（有人說：張仲景沒有學過《內經》）。
下面來看看《輔行訣》的內容和《內經》的關系。
三
《輔行訣臟腑用藥法要》辨肝臟病證文並方
肝虛則恐，實則怒。
肝病者，必兩脅下痛，痛引少腹。虛則目（盳盳）無所見，耳有所聞，心澹澹然如人將捕之。氣逆則耳聾，頰腫。治之取厥陰、少陽血者。
邪在肝，則兩脅中痛，中寒，惡血在內，則胻善瘛，節時腫。取之行間以引脅下，補三裡以溫胃中，取耳間青脈以除其瘛。
陶雲：肝德在散，故經雲：以辛補之，酸瀉之。肝苦急，急食甘以緩之。適其姓而衰之也。
《黃帝內經》
《黃帝內經·靈樞·本神第八》：
肝藏血，血舍魂，肝氣虛則恐，實則怒。
《黃帝內經·素問·藏氣法時論篇第二十二》：
肝主春，足厥陰少陽主治。其日甲乙。肝苦急，急食甘以緩之。
肝欲散，急食辛以散之，用辛補之，酸瀉之。
肝病者，兩脅下痛引少腹，令人善怒。虛則目（盳盳）無所見，耳無所聞，善恐，如人將補之。取其經厥陰與少陽，氣逆則頭痛。耳聾不聰、頰腫、取血者。
《黃帝內經·靈樞·五邪第二十》：
邪在肝，則兩脅中痛，寒中，惡血在內，行善掣節，時腳腫。取之行間，以引脅下，補三裡以溫胃中，取血脈以散惡血；取耳間青脈，以去其掣。
四
從以上所列舉的《輔行訣》中“辨肝臟病證文並方”的內容來看，它們基本上是來自《內經》的，其他臟的“病證文並方”的內容不在此贅述瞭，大家看後會發現結果亦是如此。
既然《輔行訣》的內容取自《湯液經》，《輔行訣》的理論內容又基本上源於《內經》，那《湯液經》就不可能與《內經》無關。
眾醫家均謂仲景本伊尹之法，那麼《傷寒論》當然也就不可能與《內經》無關瞭
--------------------------------------
탕액경은 상한론의 기초를 놓았다
《湯液經法》奠定《傷寒論》基礎
來源：中國中醫藥報 作者：錢超塵 北京中醫藥大學
《漢書•藝文志•經方類》曰：“《湯液經法》三十二卷。”據傳作者為商之伊尹，故又名《伊尹湯液》。《湯液經法》梁•陶弘景後失傳，是以《隋書經籍志》未加著錄。
皇甫謐《針灸甲乙經序》雲：“仲景論廣《伊尹湯液》為十數卷，用之多驗。”北宋校正醫書局林億《傷寒論序》亦稱《傷寒論》源于《湯液經法》：“夫《傷寒論》 蓋祖述大聖人之意，諸家莫其倫擬。故晉•皇甫謐序《針灸甲乙經》雲：伊尹以元聖之才，撰用《神農本草》以為《湯液》，漢•張仲景論廣《湯液》為十數卷，用 之多驗。近代太醫令王叔和撰次仲景遺論甚精，皆可施用。是仲景本伊尹之法，伊尹本神農之經，得不謂祖述大聖人之意乎？”
北宋校正醫書局于治平二年（西元1065）將《傷寒論》雕版刊行，自此《傷寒論》傳本歧出局面結束，醫家皆以宋本為定本。
北 宋治平二年本為大字本，元佑三年（西元1088）刊刻者為小字本。大字本、小字本無注，不便醫家使用，流傳日稀，至明幾成絕版。明萬曆二十七年（西元 1599）江蘇常熟著名藏書家趙開美偶得北宋小字本《傷寒論》而翻刻之，逼真原貌，後世稱趙開美翻刻本為“宋本傷寒論”。趙開美本刊行後，所據之底本旋即 亡佚。
趙開美翻刻本我國僅存五部，筆者皆目睹之，手撫之：中國中醫科學院圖書館一部、臺灣故宮博物院圖書館一部、瀋陽中國醫科大學圖書館一部、上海中醫藥大學圖書館一部、上海圖書館一部。真乃書林之奇珍，醫家之重寶也。
趙 開美本《傷寒論》每卷首頁皆題“漢•張仲景述”。南宋•趙希弁《郡齋讀書後志》卷二雲：“仲景《傷寒論》十卷，漢•張仲景述”。明代著名藏書家及刻書家毛 氏《汲古閣毛氏藏書目錄》亦雲：“仲景《傷寒論》十卷，漢•張仲景述”。“述”者，謂遵循舊說而不別立新義。《論語•學而》：“述而不作，信而好古。” 《墨子•非儒篇》“述而不作”作“循而不作”。《說文》：“述，循也”，謂沿循往軌也。則“張仲景述”者，謂仲景遵行舊說而為《傷寒論》也。張仲景為時之 大醫，當有治驗融於《傷寒論》中，然著作主體為循先賢之舊軌、錄前人之成方而為書。
仲景依《湯液經法》而為書，亦見梁•陶弘景《輔行訣五臟用藥法要》（簡稱“輔行訣”）。《輔行訣》雲：
商有聖相伊尹，撰《湯液經法》三□，為方亦三百六十首。上品上藥，為服食補益方者百二十首；中品中藥，為療疾祛邪之方，亦百二十首；下品毒藥，為殺蟲辟邪癰疽等方，亦百二十首。凡共三百六十首也。實萬代醫家之規範，蒼生護命之大寶也。
接著又說，漢末魏晉六朝醫家皆以《湯液經法》為至寶，依為軌範，並有發展：
漢晉以還，諸名醫輩：張機、衛汛、華元化、吳普、皇甫玄晏、葛稚川、范將軍等，皆當代名賢，咸師式此《湯液經法》，湣救疾苦，造福含靈。其間增減，雖各擅其異，或致新效，似亂舊經，而其旨趣，仍方圓之於規矩也。
《輔行訣》指出，仲景師式《湯液經法》撰寫《傷寒論》一部，這就為皇甫謐《針灸甲乙經序》、林億《傷寒論》序稱仲景依《湯液經法》而為書提供了可信資料。
《輔行訣》又雲：
外感天行，經方之治，有二旦、六神、大小等湯。昔南陽張機，依此諸方，撰為《傷寒論》一部，療治明悉，後學鹹尊奉之。山林僻居，倉卒難防，外感之疾，日數傳變，生死往往在三五日間，豈可疏乎？若能深明此數方者，則庶無蹈險之虞也。今亦錄而識之。
張仲景《傷寒論自序》亦雲：“勤求古訓，博采眾方”，其勤求博采者為《湯液經法》。
《湯液經法》32卷成書於西漢，就13方觀之，我國方劑學在西漢已經進入成熟階段。西漢前期道家思想頗受重視（見司馬談《論六家要旨》），因而方劑名稱亦受到道家思想影響。東漢末社會思潮發生重大變化，影響到方劑名稱亦有改變。《輔行訣》對此有說：
陽 旦者，升陽之方，以黃芪為主；陰旦者，扶陰之方，以柴胡為主；青龍者，宣發之方，以麻黃為主；白虎者，收重之方，以石膏為主；朱鳥者，清滋之方，以雞子黃 為主；玄武者，溫滲之方，以附子為主。此六方者，為六合之正精，升降陰陽，交互金木，既濟水火，乃神明之劑也。張機撰《傷寒論》，避道家之稱，故其方皆為 正名也，但以某藥為名，以推主為識耳。
張仲景“以某藥為名，以推主為識”，改變西漢方劑名稱之道家色彩，是方劑學一次重大變革。
最後的結論是：《傷寒論》以《湯液經法》為基礎而成書。
《輔行訣》原藏敦煌藏經洞，後為河北省威縣張渥南購得，傳于嫡孫張大昌，“文化大革命”中被毀。《輔行訣》抄本已出版，見張大昌、錢超塵主編之《輔行訣五臟用藥法要傳承集》。
連結
《輔行訣》所錄13方
下錄之13方，原載《湯液經法》，後被仲景收入《傷寒論》。“昔南陽張機，依此諸方，撰為《傷寒論》一部”指此。《傷寒論》方證散佚甚多，下述13方，在《傷寒論》中或有名無方，或方名皆亡。謹錄如下：
1．小陽旦湯
治天行發熱，自汗出而惡風，鼻鳴幹嘔者。桂枝三兩，芍藥三兩，生薑二兩切，甘草炙二兩，大棗十二枚。以水七升，煮取三升，溫服一升。服已，即啜熱粥飯一器，以助藥力。稍令汗出，不可大汗流漓，汗之則病不除也。若不汗出，可隨服之，取差止。日三服。
按：此為《傷寒論》桂枝湯方，見第12條。《傷寒論》陽旦湯名見第30條，有名無方。
2．正陽旦湯
（上方）若加飴一升，為正陽旦湯。
3．小陰旦湯
治天行身熱，汗出頭目痛，腹中痛，幹嘔下利者。黃芩三兩，芍藥三兩，生薑二兩切，甘草二兩炙，大棗十二枚。以水七升，煮取三升，溫服一升，日三服。服湯已，如人行三四裡時，令病者啜白胾漿一器，以助藥力。身熱去，自愈也。
按：此為《傷寒論》黃芩湯加生薑也。見第172條。芍藥作二兩。服法文字少異。
4．大陽旦湯
治凡病汗出不止，氣息惙惙，身勞力怯，惡風涼，腹中拘急，不欲飲食，皆宜此方。若脈虛大者，為更切證也。黃芪五兩，人參、桂枝、生薑各三兩，甘草炙二兩，芍藥六兩，大棗十二枚，飴一升。右七味，以水一鬥，煮取四升，去滓，內飴，更上火，令烊已。每服一升，日三，夜一服。
5．大陰旦湯
治凡病頭目眩暈，咽中幹，每喜幹嘔，食不下，心中煩滿，胸脅支痛，往來寒熱方。柴胡八兩，人參、黃芩、生薑各三兩，甘草炙二兩，芍藥四兩，大棗十二枚，半夏一升洗。上八味，以水一鬥二升，煮取六升，去滓，重上火，緩緩煎之，取得三升，溫服一升，日三服。
按：此為《傷寒論》小柴胡湯方。見第37條。無芍藥。
6．小青龍湯
治天行，發熱惡寒，汗不出而喘，身疼痛，脈緊者方。麻黃三兩，杏仁半升熬打，桂枝二兩，甘草炙一兩半。右方四味，以水七升，先煮麻黃，減二升，掠去上沫，內諸藥，煮取三升，去滓，溫服八合，必令汗出徹身，不然恐邪不盡散也。
按：此為《傷寒論》麻黃湯方。見第35條。
7．大青龍湯
治天行，表不解，心下有水氣，幹嘔，發熱而喘咳不已者。麻黃去節，細辛、芍藥、甘草炙、桂枝各三兩，五味子半升，半夏半升，乾薑三兩。右方八味，以水一鬥，先煮麻黃，減二升，掠去上沫，內諸藥，煮取三升，去滓，溫服一升。一方無乾薑，作七味。當從。
按：此為《傷寒論》小青龍湯方。見第40條。《傷寒論》“溫服一升”下之大段文字，疑為北宋校正醫書局孫奇等所加之注。南宋小字本《傷寒論》或趙開美《仲景全書》將此注成與經文字體大小相同之字而竄入正文。成無己《注解傷寒論》將此大段文字引為小注，可謂有識。
8．小白虎湯
治天行熱病，大汗出不止，口舌乾燥，飲水數升不已，脈洪大者方。石膏如雞子大棉裹，知母六兩，甘草炙二兩，粳米六合，右四味，先以水一鬥，熬粳米，熟訖去米，內諸藥，煮取六升，溫服二升，日三服。
按：此為《傷寒論》白虎湯方。見第176條。主治表述異。白虎湯《傷寒論》不分大小。
9．大白虎湯
治天行熱病，心中煩熱，時自汗出，舌幹，渴欲飲水，時呷嗽不已，久不解者方。石膏如雞子大一枚打，麥門冬半升，甘草炙二兩，粳米六合，半夏半升，生薑二兩切，竹葉三大握。右方七味，以水一鬥二升，先煮粳米，米熟訖去米，內諸藥，煮至六升，去滓，溫服二升，日三服。
按：此為《傷寒論》竹葉石膏湯方。見第397條。將生薑換為人參。
10．小朱鳥湯
治天行熱病，心氣不足，內生煩熱，坐臥不安，時下利純血如雞鴨肝者方。雞子黃二枚，阿膠三錠，黃連四兩，黃芩、芍藥各二兩。右五味，以水六升，先煮連、芩、芍三物，取三升，去滓，內膠，更上火，令烊盡，取下，待小冷，下雞子黃，攪令相得。溫服七合，日三服。
按：此為《傷寒論》黃連阿膠湯方。見第303條。主治表述異。朱鳥湯又稱朱雀湯。
11．大朱鳥湯
治 天行熱病，重下，惡毒痢，痢下純血，日數十行，羸瘦如柴，心中不安，腹中絞急，痛如刀刺方。雞子黃二枚，阿膠三錠，黃連四兩，黃芩、芍藥各二兩，人參二 兩，乾薑二兩。右藥七味，以水一鬥，先煮連、芩、參、薑等五物，得四升訖，內醇苦酒二升，再煮至四升訖，去滓。次內膠於內，更上火，令烊。取下，待小冷， 內雞子黃，攪令相得即成。每服一升，日三夜一服。
12．小玄武湯
治天行病，腎氣不足，內生虛寒，小便不利，腹中痛，四肢冷者方。茯苓三兩，芍藥三兩，白術二兩，乾薑三兩，附子一枚炮去皮。右五味，以水八升，煮取三升，去滓，溫服七合，日三服。
按：此為《傷寒論》真武湯方。見第82條。
13．大玄武湯
治腎氣虛疲，少腹中冷，腰背沉重，四肢清，小便不利，大便鴨溏，日十餘行，氣惙力弱者方。茯苓三兩，白術二兩，附子一枚炮，芍藥二兩，乾薑二兩，人參二兩，甘草二兩炙。右七味，以水一鬥，煮取四升，溫服一升，日三，夜一服。
按：此為《傷寒論》真武湯與理中丸合方。見第386條。
---------------------------------------------
청와대의 난데없는 사드 대소동
趙甲濟
4기 추가 반입을 처음 들었다고? 이미 영상으로 보도된 것인데? 태양이 동쪽에서 뜬다는 사실도 보고해야 하나?
------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------
[심층취재] "북한 장마당 발전 놀라운 수준…되돌릴 수 없을 것"
VOA(미국의 소리)
탈북민 주찬양 씨
"요즘 북한에는 두 개의 '당'이 있다. '조선노동당'과 '장마당'"…
옌볜大 진창이 소장
"중국의 80년대 상황을 뛰어넘었다"
-----------------------------------------
“4차 산업혁명은 핵심 기술이 많은 파생 기술을 유발하며 충격을 준 1·2·3차 혁명과는 다르게 진행되고 있습니다. 4차 산업 혁명을 특정 기술의 혁명으로 볼 것이 아니라 기존 기술이 융합을 이용한 ‘21세기 형 혁신(이노베이션)’으로 보는 것이 맞습니다.”
---신재원 미국 항공우주국(NASA) 항공 연구기술개발국 국장
원문보기:
http://biz.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2017/05/30/2017053001423.html#csidx1006af6e567653fabde559b97a988c6
----> 처음 산업 혁명이 일어났을 때, 영국 정부가 자금과 기술을 대서 일어난 건 아니었다. 그런데 지금은 4차 산업혁명을 핑게로 정치하는 인간들이 어떡하던 여기에 개입해서, 괜히 헛소리나 하고 떡고물을 챙기려 하고 있다. 이번 여름에 벼락이 쳐서 이 인간들 좀 정리했으면 좋겠다.
--------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------
---신재원 미국 항공우주국(NASA) 항공 연구기술개발국 국장
원문보기:
http://biz.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2017/05/30/2017053001423.html#csidx1006af6e567653fabde559b97a988c6
----> 처음 산업 혁명이 일어났을 때, 영국 정부가 자금과 기술을 대서 일어난 건 아니었다. 그런데 지금은 4차 산업혁명을 핑게로 정치하는 인간들이 어떡하던 여기에 개입해서, 괜히 헛소리나 하고 떡고물을 챙기려 하고 있다. 이번 여름에 벼락이 쳐서 이 인간들 좀 정리했으면 좋겠다.
--------------------------------------------------
桂枝加附子湯
黃煌
桂枝湯加味方，有強壯、回陽、鎮痛的功效，適用于發汗過多導致的亡陽證，以及以多汗、怕冷、身體疼痛、脈弱爲特征的疾病。
【經典配方】桂枝三兩（去皮），芍藥三兩，甘草三兩（炙），生薑三兩（切），大棗十二枚（擘），附子一枚（炮，去皮，破八片）。上六味，以水七升，煮取三升，去滓，溫服一升。（《傷寒論》）
【常用劑量】桂枝15g或肉桂10g，白芍15g，炙甘草15g，生薑15g或乾薑10g，紅棗20g，制附子10g。
【煎服法】以水1200ml，煮沸後調文火再煎煮30～40分鍾，取湯液450ml，分3次溫服。
【經典方證】太陽病，發汗，遂漏不止；其人惡風，小便難，四肢微急，難以屈伸者。（20）
【體質要求】參見桂枝湯體質。
【適用疾病】各種休克、誤用發汗劑之後出現的過汗虛脫、心動過緩、心肌梗死、心肌炎、陽虛體質的感冒、變態反應性鼻炎、哮喘、慢性腰腿痛、關節炎、頸椎病、腰椎退變增生、腰肌勞損、腰椎間盤突出症、更年期綜合征等。
【加減法】汗多、心悸，加龍骨、牡蠣；更年期汗多、關節冷痛，加當歸、仙靈脾、巴戟天、細辛；心肌梗死，或汗出、胸痛，加川芎、葛根、紅參。
【注意事項】附子有毒，如果用量大于15g，宜先煎30分鍾，以後每增加10g，先煎時間遞增15分鍾
---------------------------------------------------------
불교 경제학: 상품이나 소비보다 사람과 창조성을 더 먼저 생각하는 방법
불교 경제학의 핵심은 단순과 비폭력이다.
Buddhist Economics: How to Start Prioritizing People Over Products and Creativity Over Consumption
“Work and leisure are complementary parts of the same living process and cannot be separated without destroying the joy of work and the bliss of leisure.”
By Maria Popova
Much has been said about the difference between money and wealth and how we, as individuals, can make more of the latter, but the divergence between the two is arguably even more important the larger scale of nations and the global economy. What does it really mean to create wealth for people — for humanity — as opposed to money for governments and corporations?
That’s precisely what the influential German-born British economist, statistician, Rhodes Scholar, and economic theorist E. F. Schumacher explores in his seminal 1973 book Small Is Beautiful: Economics as if People Mattered (public library) — a magnificent collection of essays at the intersection of economics, ethics, and environmental awareness, which earned Schumacher the prestigious Prix Européen de l’Essai Charles Veillon award and was deemed by The Times Literary Supplement one of the 100 most important books published since WWII. Sharing an ideological kinship with such influential minds as Tolstoy and Gandhi, Schumacher’s is a masterwork of intelligent counterculture, applying history’s deepest, most timeless wisdom to the most pressing issues of modern life in an effort to educate, elevate and enlighten.
One of the most compelling essays in the book, titled “Buddhist Economics,” applies spiritual principles and moral purpose to the question of wealth. Writing around the same time that Alan Watts considered the subject, Schumacher begins:
“Right Livelihood” is one of the requirements of the Buddha’s Noble Eightfold Path. It is clear, therefore, that there must be such a thing as Buddhist economics.
[…]
Spiritual health and material well-being are not enemies: they are natural allies.
Traditional Western economics, Schumacher argues, is bedeviled by a self-righteousness of sorts that blinds us to this fact — a fundamental fallacy that considers “goods as more important than people and consumption as more important than creative activity.” He writes:
Economists themselves, like most specialists, normally suffer from a kind of metaphysical blindness, assuming that theirs is a science of absolute and invariable truths, without any presuppositions. Some go as far as to claim that economic laws are as free from “metaphysics” or “values” as the law of gravitations.
From this stems our chronic desire to avoid work and the difficulty of finding truly fulfilling work that aligns with our sense of purpose. Schumacher paints the backdrop for the modern malady of overwork:
There is universal agreement that a fundamental source of wealth is human labor. Now, the modern economist has been brought up to consider “labor” or work as little more than a necessary evil. From the point of view of the employer, it is in any case simply an item of cost, to be reduced to a minimum if it cannot be eliminated altogether, say, by automation. From the point of view of the workman, it is a “disutility”; to work is to make a sacrifice of one’s leisure and comfort, and wages are a kind of compensation for the sacrifice. Hence the ideal from the point of view of the employer is to have output without employees, and the ideal from the point of view of the employee is to have income without employment.
The consequences of these attitudes both in theory and in practice are, of course, extremely far-reaching. If the ideal with regard to work is to get rid of it, every method that “reduces the work load” is a good thing. The most potent method, short of automation, is the so-called “division of labor”… Here it is not a matter of ordinary specialization, which mankind has practiced from time immemorial, but of dividing up every complete process of production into minute parts, so that the final product can be produced at great speed without anyone having had to contribute more than a totally insignificant and, in most cases, unskilled movement of his limbs.
Schumacher contrasts this with the Buddhist perspective:
The Buddhist point of view takes the function of work to be at least threefold: to give a man a chance to utilize and develop his faculties; to enable him to overcome his ego-centeredness by joining with other people in a common task; and to bring forth the goods and services needed for a becoming existence. Again, the consequences that flow from this view are endless. To organize work in such a manner that it becomes meaningless, boring, stultifying, or nerve-racking for the worker would be little short of criminal; it would indicate a greater concern with goods than with people, an evil lack of compassion and a soul-destroying degree of attachment to the most primitive side of this worldly existence. Equally, to strive for leisure as an alternative to work would be considered a complete misunderstanding of one of the basic truths of human existence, namely that work and leisure are complementary parts of the same living process and cannot be separated without destroying the joy of work and the bliss of leisure.
From the Buddhist point of view, there are therefore two types of mechanization which must be clearly distinguished: one that enhances a man’s skill and power and one that turns the work of man over to a mechanical slave, leaving man in a position of having to serve the slave.
E.F. Schumacher
With an undertone of Gandhi’s timeless words, Schumacher writes:
Buddhist economics must be very different from the economics of modern materialism, since the Buddhist sees the essence of civilization not in a multiplication of wants but in the purification of human character. Character, at the same time, is formed primarily by a man’s work. And work, properly conducted in conditions of human dignity and freedom, blesses those who do it and equally their products.
But Schumacher takes care to point out that the Buddhist disposition, rather than a condemnation of the material world, is a more fluid integration with it:
While the materialist is mainly interested in goods, the Buddhist is mainly interested in liberation. But Buddhism is “The Middle Way” and therefore in no way antagonistic to physical well-being. It is not wealth that stands in the way of liberation but the attachment to wealth; not the enjoyment of pleasurable things but the craving for them. The keynote of Buddhist economics, therefore, is simplicity and non-violence. From an economist’s point of view, the marvel of the Buddhist way of life is the utter rationality of its pattern — amazingly small means leading to extraordinarily satisfactory results.
This concept, Schumacher argues, is extremely difficult for an economist from a consumerist culture to grasp as we once again bump up against the warped Western prioritization of productivity over presence:
[The modern Western economist] is used to measuring the “standard of living” by the amount of annual consumption, assuming all the time that a man who consumes more is “better off” than a man who consumes less. A Buddhist economist would consider this approach excessively irrational: since consumption is merely a means to human well-being, the aim should be to obtain the maximum of well-being with the minimum of consumption.
[…]
The ownership and the consumption of goods is a means to an end, and Buddhist economics is the systematic study of how to attain given ends with the minimum means.
[Western] economics, on the other hand, considers consumption to be the sole end and purpose of all economic activity, taking the factors of production — land, labor, and capital — as the means. The former, in short, tries to maximize human satisfactions by the optimal pattern of consumption, while the latter tries to maximize consumption by the optimal pattern of productive effort.
This maximization of “human satisfactions,” Schumacher argues, is rooted in two intimately related Buddhist concepts — simplicity and non-violence:
The optimal pattern of consumption, producing a high degree of human satisfaction by means of a relatively low rate of consumption, allows people to live without great pressure and strain and to fulfill the primary injunctions of Buddhist teaching: “Cease to do evil; try to do good.” As physical resources are everywhere limited, people satisfying their needs by means of a modest use of resources are obviously less likely to be at each other’s throats than people depending upon a high rate of use. Equally, people who live in highly self-sufficient local communities are less likely to get involved in large-scale violence than people whose existence depends on worldwide systems of trade.
Writing shortly after Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring sparked the modern environmental movement, Schumacher presages the modern groundswell of advocacy for sustainable locally sourced products:
From the point of view of Buddhist economics … production from local resources for local needs is the most rational way of economic life, while dependence on imports from afar and the consequent need to produce for export to unknown and distant peoples is highly uneconomic and justifiable only in exceptional cases and on a small scale.
He concludes by framing the enduring value of a Buddhist approach to economics, undoubtedly even more urgently needed today than it was in 1973:
It is in the light of both immediate experience and long-term prospects that the study of Buddhist economics could be recommended even to those who believe that economic growth is more important than any spiritual or religious values. For it is not a question of choosing between “modern growth” and “traditional stagnation.” It is a question of finding the right path to development, the Middle Way between materialist heedlessness and traditionalist immobility, in short, of finding “Right Livelihood.”
-------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------
풍력 발전에 쓰이는 터빈의 거대한 날개가 탄소복합물이나 섬유유리로 만들어졌는데, 분리해서 재생하기가 힘들다고 한다. 2021년까지 1만6천 톤의 날개를 처리해야 한다고 한다.
----------------------------------------------------------------
댓글 없음:
댓글 쓰기