有声 |《炼爱》第25天—原谅吧，放飞你的心，上帝会用祂的方式去处理伤害你的人

第25日挑战

• 今天，你原谅了伴侣的什么错误？

• 你背负这个负担已经多久了？

• 现在你为什么决定将这个问题交给主？

2015.11.7

我们的不原谅，不放手，其实是将自己关在牢笼里。黑暗、封闭、压抑的密室，每天都在心里折磨着自己。

这是我从前就知道的，所以我的生活里没有什么让我恨得牙痒痒的人。我也会经常劝别人，原谅了，就自由了，放飞的是自己。

曾经伤害你的人，有些是很爱你很在乎你的，只是他们不知道该怎么表达爱，所以误伤了你，比如说很多的亲朋好友。既然不是故意，就选择原谅，让大家好受，谁不犯错呢？

但是也有一些，真的是不爱你，不在乎你的死活，为了达成自己的私欲，就是要让你伤心，看到你不仅痛苦一时，而且被怨恨折磨一生，他/她也许在远远的地方得意地笑呢……

这样的人当然少，但不是没有，那又何苦让他/她得逞呢？所以，说来说去， “原谅”是一件想起来很困难，但做到了就绝对利于自己身心灵健康的事。

并没有什么事是我不能原谅先生的，我难道要记住他所有到了公司却忘记电脑在家的日子吗？这是他的弱点，不是错误，而且上次给他做了那张漂亮的清单，还真有作用了，他每天都检查一遍再走，于是，问题就解决啦！原来是我这个帮助者做得不到位！

想起最近一次跟他不高兴，我把自己关在笼子里两天，很快，就自我宣布“刑满释放”，乖乖出笼。

什么事呢？你们听了肯定要说“原来舒舒也是一个很作的女人呀，天下女人一个样啊！”

让你们笑一笑吧：

就一个月前，十月初是我的阳历生日，老妈提前告诉我，今年好特别呀，我的阳历生日和阴历生日是重合的，千载难逢啊，好好庆祝一下哦！

好吧，一个阳历，一个阴历，已经够我这个糊涂先生头大了。问题是，我还有一个官方生日，是十几岁换身份证的时候被官方搞错的，换到手的时候，我的生日莫名其妙就拖后了一个星期。

于是，我有三个生日了，糊涂先生就更糊涂了，很惨。

一般呢，先生最起码能记住两个，他还下载了一个万年历，知道我爸妈是看重阴历的，每年也都查一查。他不糊涂的时候，我能收三次礼物呢。偏偏今年，如此重要的阳历和阴历重合的一年，他的手机提醒失灵了！！

那天中午，劳作半天之后，看看没有任何表示，我就平静温和却有些悲伤地跟他讲：“今天是我的两个生日重合，很重要，你却忘了，现在我自己出去享受了。”

哼！看着他大惊失色，双手捧头，赶紧去卧室疯狂找手机，我心里好像还有丝丝快意，然后就自己出去逛街吃饭看电影了……

那天晚上自己看完电影还掉了几滴泪，自怜得不行，现在想起来却只想哈哈笑。

第二天我就原谅他了，他这属于误伤，还无数次道歉，我当然不好意思继续小题大做。小女人本性难改，求上帝宽恕。作两天也就算了。他本来就是糊涂嘛，再说他还有千般好嘛。Let it go！

这是我每天都需要做的训练。不过我眼前没有什么特别不满的需要放手。Helen通常是没有什么坏行为需要我原谅的。

当然我知道这样的回答对读者们来说并没有什么帮助，所以我还是允许自己回忆一下我的第一次婚姻。我不说太多的细节，只是想表示:

我很理解“选择原谅”有多么的困难——如果另一方对自己的坏行为丝毫不羞愧、完全不后悔、根本无意改进的话。

我多么希望，在我第一次的婚姻里，我就能够更清楚地了解到：一个人可以选择原谅，只是让自己免于怒气以及要惩罚对方的意念，与此同时，他/她不需要幻想对方会改变，不需要为了求得和平而装作什么事儿都没有，这样反而会助长坏行为。

你可以温和却坚定地说：“我不想与你生气，那是浪费时间，但是我不会假装什么事儿都没有。以后与你相处，我会让我的期望比较实际一些。”

语气一定要温和。我不会告诉你这样就会拯救你的婚姻——也许会吧，但也可能不管你语气怎么温和，也不管你怎么清楚地表明你不会因此发怒，你的配偶都可能会拒绝与一个不赞成他/她的观点的人一起生活，也许接着就会要求离婚了。

如何是那样的话，哥林多前书7章15节可以派上用场：“倘若那不信的人要离去，就由他离去吧！无论是弟兄，是姐妹，遇着这样的事都不必拘束。神召我们原是要我们和睦。”

上面一段经文有几个字要搞清楚：圣经并没有用“基督徒”或“非基督徒”，用的是πιστὸς pistos 和ἄπιστος apistos，一般翻译成“信徒”和“不信者”，指的是“一个与上帝有着信心的关系的人”，和“一个与上帝没有信心的关系的人”。在新约圣经里，“信徒”的意思不是“相信某种神学主张的人”，而是“相信上帝，且也能被上帝所信任能依义而行的人”。“信徒”既是一个信靠上帝的人，也是一个忠心的、值得被信靠的人。

从这个意义上来说，我认为我们当中绝大多数都是不完美的“信徒”，我们在生命中的某些方面都还在为了要做正确的事而挣扎。不过，如果你遇到一个家伙自称为“基督徒”，却公开地犯罪，根本都不尝试去做正确的事，圣经教导我们要看那人为“不信者”。原因很简单，从简明的“信徒”定义上来看，他们就不是嘛。

我与前妻离婚后的头两年我很难原谅她，所以我自己不是成功范例，但是我看到有其他人处理得比我好的，果效很不错。不过，我还是可以用我一个朋友的例子来说明一下：

我的这个朋友是嘻嘻哈哈没心没肺的不诚实，说话极不算数。人家想听什么他就迎合着说，从来也不管说的是不是当真，更不去管说了之后是不是要去做。

刚开始几次，他承诺要做什么事，之后又坚持说他从来没有讲过，我就生气了。

但是，后来，我就假定他说要做什么都是空话，然后我再根据那样的假设安排我自己的计划。我就将他的话权当娱乐笑料，而非真实信息。那样，当他的承诺又泡汤，或者又说什么假话，我就已经有心理准备了。我从不冒险去相信他会说真话，或者会信守承诺。

一旦我搞清楚他的性格，并相应调整（自己的反应），他的言行不一就再也没有伤害过我。

你看，当我确认他的不负责任不会对我造成更大的伤害，我就不去想着要改变他。结果，后来的几年里面，我跟他一起还玩得挺开心，因为他确实是一个有趣又和善的家伙，他也不是有意要伤害别人。

如果他是个讲真话又信守承诺的人不是更好吗？当然是。不过，那是他自己的事，不是我能控制的。我所能控制的是：

我要相信他说的话吗？不。

我期望他遵守承诺吗？不。

我要浪费时间跟他生气吗？不。

我还要跟他做朋友，向他展示上帝的爱吗？当然，为何不呢？

如果你让我举一个例子说说他对我撒的谎，或者他打破的承诺，我还真的说不出来。你瞧，我真的没有怨恨。通常我们记得一个人曾对我们有过什么恶行，那是因为我们在脑子里一直翻来覆去放映那些卑劣的情景，然后我们提醒自己，那人就是这样值得我们生气。

我们用英语说那样的行为是“喂养怨恨”。想象一下“怨恨”这个家伙生病了，呆在医院，然后我们就是照顾它的护士，很卖力地要帮助“怨恨”活下来。

我原谅我的朋友时，并没有忘记他的性格，但是“Dave（这不是他的真名）是个骗子”这句话就不需要背景故事了。你不需要记住他所有的谎言，然后才能记住一个简单事实：根据经验，Dave讲话从不当真。可是，如果你想喂养怨恨，你就一定要记住所有细节了。细节被淡忘，情绪也就随之消失了。我没有喂养我的怨恨，我从恼怒中被释放。虽然我不会跟Dave做生意，但我不去记他对我撒过什么谎。我就记得他对我撒过几次谎，他有几次没遵守诺言，但我不记得细节，也不需要记得。

（舒舒注：翻到这里，不得不加注。探讨一下，这是不是男人和女人的区别呢？我不同意他所说的，要忘记细节了才是真正原谅。说实话，有些太深的伤害，那些细节是没有办法从脑子里抹去的，我可以选择原谅，但是忘不了啊，除非做个手术消除记忆。伤口结的疤在那里，就是在那里呀，除非我老年痴呆了才会忘记。所以，翻完这段，我去跟他说，你不记得了，只是代表人家伤你不够深，还有你老了！！他大笑。接着他说，你今晚早点休息，明天再做功课吧。我说不行，我要遵守承诺，我不要做那个Dave，他笑着睡着了。）

This is a discipline I do every day. There are no outstanding grievances at the moment. Helen does not exactly generate a wealth of bad behavior for me to forgive.

As I realize this is not necessarily helpful to Helen’s Gentle Readers, I will go back in memory to my first marriage, not to provide any details, but just to say that I understand how difficult it is to forgive a person who feels no shame, regret or compunction for bad behavior, and has not the slightest intention of reforming. I wish, in that first marriage, I had more clearly understood that one can forgive — in the sense of letting go anger and thoughts of revenge or punishment — and yet still be under no illusions, nor enable the bad behavior by pretending nothing is wrong in order to keep the peace. You can say gently but firmly, “I am not going to waste time being angry with you over this; but I am not going to pretend there is nothing wrong with it; and in my future dealings with you I will work from realistic expectations.” It has to be gently, though. And I’m not going to tell you that it will save your marriage — it may well be that, no matter how gently you say, “I am not going to pretend there is nothing wrong with what you are doing,” and no matter how clear you make it that you are not going to be angry over it, your spouse may refuse to live with someone who disapproves of them and may threaten divorce. In such a case, I would say that 1 Corinthians 7:15 applies: “But if the faithless spouse walks out, let him walk out. The brother or sister is not bound in such a case; God has called us to live in peace.”

Just to make a couple of words clear in that passage: the Bible doesn’t use the words “Christian” and “non-Christian”; it uses instead the terms πιστὸς pistos and ἄπιστος apistos, which are usually translated “believer” and “unbeliever” but which actually mean something like “person who has a faith relationship” and “person who does not have a faith relationship,” in this case with God. A “believer” in the New Testament is NOT defined as “a person who believes certain theological propositions about God,” but means instead, “someone who trusts God and who generally can be trusted by God to do what is right” — it means “faithful and trustworthy” just as much as it means “someone who believes and trusts.” I grant that most of us are only imperfectly “believers” in this sense; most of us have areas of our life where we still struggle to do what is right. But at a certain point, if you have a person who calls himself a “Christian,” but he lives in open sin and isn’t even willing to try to do what is right, the Bible instructs us to deal with that person as we do with the “apistos,” for the very good and simple reason that they ARE, in the simple and straightforward meaning of the term, not “pistos.”

I had trouble forgiving my ex-wife until after we had been divorced for a couple of years; so I can’t point to my own particular case as a marital success story, though I know that other people who handled things better than I did have been known to see quite astonishing results. However, I can point to a very good example of this type of reconciliation in the matter of personal friendship. I had a friend who was cheerfully and thoughtlessly dishonest — and in particular, any promise he made was worth the air he wrote it on. He just said whatever he thought people wanted to hear and didn’t worry much about whether it was true or whether he was ever going to follow up with, you know, action. The first couple of times he promised to do something and then later insisted he had never said any such thing, I got angry. And the first couple of times he assured me something was true that turned out to be false, I also got angry. Eventually, though, I simply adjusted and made all my plans on the assumption that he would not do anything he said he would do, and simply treated anything he said as entertainment rather than as information. That way I was always prepared when, inevitably, the promise got broken or the statement turned out to be false; and I never gambled anything on his keeping his promise or telling the truth; and so the disconnect between his words and reality never did me any harm — once I figured out his character and adjusted accordingly.

You see, once I had ensured that his unreliability would not do me any further damage, I simply let go of any need to change him. It turned out that I had a lot of fun hanging out with him over the following few years, because he actually was a pleasant and friendly and fun guy to be around, and didn’t mean any particular harm.

Would it have better for him to be a man who told his truth and kept his promises? Sure. But that was under his control, not mine. What was under my control, was simply this: Would I believe anything he said? No. Would I expect him to keep his promises? No. Would I waste any time being angry with him? No. Would I still be his friend and enjoy his company and show him God’s love? Sure, why not?

And if you ask me now to give you an example of a lie he told me, or of a promise he broke…actually, I wouldn’t be able to do it. I haven’t held the grudge; you see. Usually we can remember all the bad things somebody else has done to us in detail, because we keep replaying the whole sordid story over and over in our minds to remind ourselves of why he DESERVES for us to be mad at him. In English this is called “nursing the grudge” — imagine that the grudge is sick and in the hospital, and we are the nurse working very hard to keep the grudge alive.

When I forgave my friend I didn’t forget what I had learned about his character; but the statement, “Dave [not his real name] is a liar” doesn’t need a backstory. You don’t have to remember the details of all the specific times he’s lied to you to remember the simple fact, “Based on experience I never assume Dave is telling the truth.” But you DO have to remember the details if you want to “nurse the grudge,” because without details, emotions die out. I didn’t nurse the grudge; I was freed from the anger; and even though I still wouldn’t go into business with Dave I no longer remember anything bad he ever did to me. I remember that he did lie to me a few times and that he did break a few promises; but I don’t remember the details and don’t need to.