雙語(yǔ)閱讀：怎樣捐贈(zèng)錢(qián)財(cái)

雙語(yǔ)閱讀：怎樣捐贈(zèng)錢(qián)財(cái)

　　摘要：我的成功之路，也是大多數(shù)美國(guó)商人的致富之路，它由無(wú)休止的辛勤工作、社交活動(dòng)、明智的投資、頭痛和心痛一起鋪設(shè)而成。我曾認(rèn)為成功理所當(dāng)然會(huì)給我?guī)?lái)幸福。我聽(tīng)從了喬治·羅伯特·懷特的忠告，為自己思想的愉悅和自由另辟蹊徑。

　　Many years ago I met a man whose uniquepsychology helped me to shed a life of struggle anduneasiness for great happiness, for peace of mind,and for a measure of success I otherwise would nothave attained.

　　多年以前我結(jié)識(shí)的一位朋友用他獨(dú)特的心理幫助我擺脫了充滿斗爭(zhēng)和不安的生活。沒(méi)有他的幫助，我的生活不可能這樣幸福，心態(tài)不可能這樣平和，也不可能取得一定程度的成功。

　　His name was George Robert White, a man who wasorphaned and impoverished at a tender age. Yet, aman whose God-given beliefs made him both amaterial and a spiritual millionaire at thirty.

　　他名叫喬治·羅伯特·懷特，幼年時(shí)父母雙亡，貧困不堪，然而，因信奉上帝，三十歲時(shí)便成為物質(zhì)上和精神上的百萬(wàn)富翁。

　　My path to success, and to what I had considered its natural result- happiness-was theordinary road over which most American businessmen travel, namely, endless hours of hardwork, social contacts, wise investments, headaches and heartaches.

　　我的成功之路，也是大多數(shù)美國(guó)商人的致富之路，它由無(wú)休止的辛勤工作、社交活動(dòng)、明智的投資、頭痛和心痛一起鋪設(shè)而成。我曾認(rèn)為成功理所當(dāng)然會(huì)給我?guī)?lái)幸福。

　　To be sure, in a materialistic sense, I had traveled a long way from my father’s farm in NovaScotia. I had become an executive in a multi-million dollar drug firm. But where was theresulting happiness that my material gain was supposed to have afforded me?

　　當(dāng)然，從物質(zhì)的意義講，從我在父親的新斯科舍農(nóng)場(chǎng)做工至今，經(jīng)過(guò)多年的辛勞，我已成為一個(gè)有百萬(wàn)美元資產(chǎn)的制藥公司的總裁，但豐厚的物質(zhì)財(cái)富應(yīng)該帶給我的幸福又在何方?

　　In my private moments of mental inventory, I discovered that I had no more peace of mind,nor was I less afraid of the problems of life and death, than many years before, when I plannedmy road to happiness and success by the flickering lamp in my father’s tiny farmhouse. Thereason was, I had neglected spiritual values in my anxiety for material gain.

　　但我一人獨(dú)處整理思緒時(shí)，我發(fā)現(xiàn)自己的心態(tài)不如多年以前在我父親那幢小小的農(nóng)舍，坐在搖曳的油燈旁規(guī)劃我的幸福成功之路時(shí)那樣平和，我仍然同當(dāng)年一樣害怕想到生與死的問(wèn)題。原因是：在我急于追求物質(zhì)財(cái)富時(shí)，我忽略了精神財(cái)富的價(jià)值。

　　It took the kindly advice of George Robert White, to open the pathway for me to happiness andfreedom of mind. The important lesson Mr. White taught me is this: If we are to be happy, if weare to be successful in every aspect of the word, if we are to live truly full lives, we must shareourselves, as well as our material gain, with our fellow men.

　　我聽(tīng)從了喬治·羅伯特·懷特的忠告，為自己思想的愉悅和自由另辟蹊徑。懷特先生對(duì)我的教導(dǎo)是：若要幸福，贏得真正意義上的成功，生活得充實(shí)，就必須與我們的同胞分享我們的一切，包括物質(zhì)財(cái)富。

　　As a young man, Mr. White took over the leadership of a small soap-manufacturing plant inBoston, and throughout his career he gave away to charity a large part of his net profits.

　　懷特先生接過(guò)波士頓那家小肥皂廠的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)職位時(shí)，還很年輕。從那時(shí)起直至他事業(yè)的終結(jié)，他將工廠的大部分純利捐獻(xiàn)給了慈善事業(yè)。

　　Yet, despite his unusual business practices, Mr. White built that tiny concern into the world-famous Cuticura Corporation, and became the multi-million-dollar manufacturer of CuticuraSoap, Ointment and Shampoo.

　　盡管他的經(jīng)商之路不尋常，他卻致力使一家小小的工廠發(fā)展成世界著名的庫(kù)提庫(kù)亞公司，一個(gè)資產(chǎn)達(dá)百萬(wàn)美元，生產(chǎn)庫(kù)提庫(kù)亞肥皂、軟膏和香波的廠家。

　　I shall never forget Mr. White’s words: “Personal success, business success, built uponmaterialism alone, are empty shells concealing disappointment, saddened lives,” which heepitomized by saying: “Cast your bread upon the waters and it will come back in abundance.”

　　我永遠(yuǎn)不會(huì)忘記懷特先生的箴言：“只以物質(zhì)主義為目的的個(gè)人成功和商業(yè)成功，都是空殼，里面藏著失望和令人憂心忡忡的生活。”他將其濃縮為：“行善不圖回報(bào)，就有豐厚的回報(bào)。”

　　Since Mr. White’s death, I have endeavored, as his successor, to adhere to his code of ethics.Two dollars out of every three dollars profit earned by our corporation is shared with others inhelping to make our nation a better place in which to live.

　　懷特先生去世后，作為他的繼任，我盡力恪守他的道德信條，我們將公司利潤(rùn)的三分之二捐贈(zèng)給社會(huì)，以改善美國(guó)人的生活。

　　We, in our corporation, believe that it is not sufficient only to manufacture as fine a productas is possible target=_blank class=infotextkey>possible-millions of dollars over the years arebeing shared by our corporation for the advancement of medicine and science, for chemicalresearch, for art and for beauty.

　　在我們公司，我們的信念是：盡力生產(chǎn)優(yōu)質(zhì)產(chǎn)品是不夠的——多年以來(lái)，我們公司將數(shù)百萬(wàn)美元投入研發(fā)藥物和科學(xué)，研究化學(xué)，提高生活的藝術(shù)氛圍和人們的審美能力。

　　In my personal life I have adopted Mr. White’s beliefs, and, in doing so, I have become muchbetter equipped to serve humanity.

　　懷特先生的信念也成為我私生活的信條，以它為行動(dòng)準(zhǔn)則，我為人類的奉獻(xiàn)更多。

　　My reward, my blessings, have come to me in the form of personal satisfaction and peace ofmind that had been substantially foreign to me.

　　做奉獻(xiàn)讓自己心滿意足，心態(tài)平和，雖然它們本不是我的天性。這就是我得到的回報(bào)，我的福祉。

　　Yes, I believe that spirituality is the needed seasoning to America’s materialism. But it mustbe that kind of spirituality that takes the form of help and service toward our fellow men.

　　的確，我相信，美國(guó)的物質(zhì)主義非常需要精神力量的調(diào)劑。這種精神力量必須表現(xiàn)在幫助同胞、為同胞服務(wù)上。

　　有錢(qián)人應(yīng)該給慈善機(jī)構(gòu)捐款

　　Money is what makes the world go round, they say, but that is only true if you have it. The suggestion that people who have more money ought to give more to charity just makes sense to most; however, I think the rich should not have to part with their hardly earned cash.

　　In the first place, they should spend it on art. Creating a moral code that compels the rich to pour their money down the bottomless rat-hole of charitable causes will diminish investment in culture, the lasting legacy of any civilization. Take Bill & Melinda Posterns, along with their friend Warren Pummel, for example. They are reputedly the three most “generous” philanthropists in the world, but the 40 billion dollar endowment of their foundation is a drop in the bucket compared to what is needed to alleviate hunger, malaria, AIDS, and malnutrition. If they had spent their money on art, they could have bought 40 museums with better collections than the Detroit Institute of Arts. Imagine that!

　　Second, they should spend it on expensive educations for their children. It is unnatural to ask somebody to spend their money on people they don’t even know. For instance, if a man can spend a million dollars on sending his two children to engineering school or a million dollars on digging wells for people with no drinking water, he should spend it on his children who might someday invent a way to dig wells for half the cost. Furthermore, those children might be able to get more rich themselves from the royalties on their new patents.

　　Finally, if people who earn more money store up their treasure, but spend less on the poor and relief work, it will eventually lead to the semi-revolution that we need. The late poet laureate Robert Frost astutely observed that we need a semi-revolution, because the trouble with a total revolution is that it brings the same class up on top. Keeping riches out of the hands of those who manufacture their luxury goods for them will soon lead to a necessary revolt.

　　You might think the richer somebody gets, the more money they should give away to charity, but these are three strong reasons for letting the rich spend their money on other things or just to keep it in their pockets.