家畜个体性再考--以河南蒙旗策塔尔实践为例

Rethinking the Individuality of Domesticated Animals The Practice of Tsetar in Henanmengqi, Qinghai, China

与其他藏传佛教畜牧地区一样,在河南蒙旗~①亦可观察到"策塔尔"~②实践,即牧民将畜群中的个别家畜不杀不卖,而给予其自由的实践。策塔尔实践的动机虽多种多样,但基本来源于牧民和家畜之间所共有的日常喜怒哀乐的经历。原则上所有家畜个体都有可能成为策塔尔实践的对象,不受家畜物种限制。这种实践也可解释为基于佛教教义的放生或以积攒功德为目的的行为。但是,从河南蒙旗的策塔尔实践来看,对于特定个人和特定家畜之间,以特定的事件为契机所联结的特有关系却无法依此做出合适的解释和说明。将策塔尔家畜个体视为表现人与神关系的象征性存在的观点,或者将个体视为分类体系物种范畴的延展和界限的观点都无法详尽把握此种关系。而人类个体与家畜个体之间的关系,恰恰应该被认为是策塔尔实践的本身。一方面,策塔尔家畜作为这种关系的标指而发挥作用,以自身的外观和经验,使其成为与特定个人所结成关系的当事者,从而获得个体性。另一方面,当人们言及策塔尔家畜时,常使用的话语是表示绝对幸运意义的"漾"~③。通过放策塔尔,人与家畜的漾都会得到提高,这是策塔尔实践的根本逻辑。漾不限于人和家畜,遍存宇宙万物之中,具有普遍性。另外,漾不受物种范畴所约束,内在于万物个体之中,又兼有具体性。漾具体性反映人与家畜的特有关系,漾的普遍性使这种关系与不杀不卖行为结合,形成并延续以策塔尔命名的实践。在这一实践中,人与家畜的特有关系通过漾而形象化,同时,通过漾的循环,家畜之间、人与家畜之间的连续性得以确立。

Just as in other Buddhist pastoral regions, the people of Henanmengqi designate many domesticated animals as not for sale or slaughter,calling them Tsetar（tshethar）. The motives behind Tsetar practice are varied-However, most concern the everyday experiences of joy, anger, humour and pathos shared between the pastoralists and the domesticated animals as individuals. In principle, any individual domesticated animal of any species can become an object of Tsetar practice, and such designation is not influenced by dogma or group pressure.One might assume that this practice is one of religion, for example, aiming at virtuous deeds based on a Buddhism doctrine, but that is not necessarily the case, at least for the people in Henanmengqi. What can be seen in practice is the specific relationship between the individual person and individual domesticated animal that has been created and fostered through specific events. We cannot reduce it either to a perception that Tsetar animals could be viewed as a religious symbolic entity that connects man and gods, or to an understanding that an individual could be regarded as the extension and limit of a general system of classification. Rather, the specific relation between an individual human and an individual domesticated animal underpins the practice of Tsetar.The individual domesticated animal, on the one hand, plays an active role in serving as an indexical conduit that connects itself with a specific hu？man being, thus gaining the status of individuality through its appearance and shared experience. On the other hand, when the human being is related to an individual domesticated animal by way of its character, the word Yang（g.yang, unconditional good fortune） is often used. It is believed that if Tsetar is performed, the Yang of humans and domesticated animals will amass. That underlies the logic of the practice of Tsetar.The Yang, in the sense of unconditional good fortune, is omnipresent not only in humans and livestock, but everywhere and in everything, so it is general（or abstract）. However, the Yang bypasses any species category, and is inherent in the individual unit of everything, so it is both general and concrete. Yang＇s concreteness is a reflection of the specific relation between humans and domesticated animals. While the concreteness implies the specific relation between humans and domesticated animals, the generality makes a combination of both the specific relationships and the non-actions of not allowing sale or slaughter, and ensures the practice of Tsetar. Under that practice, the Yang frames the relationship between animal and animal, as well as that between humans and domesticated animals, with the flow of Yang sustaining the continuity of their relationship.