Output:
"The academic tradition of Confucianism" is about the history of Confucian learning and its academic ideals. In this aspect, the positive value of Confucianism can be seen, and Confucianism can offer significant resources for human society. Now and in the future, Confucianism should not be ideologized. Learning is learning, and it should not depend on politics. No school of learning should be viewed as the ruling one and the "contention of a hundred schools of thought" should be put into practice. Of course, we must analyze the thoughts offered by sages and outstanding men in history, and interpret them according to contemporary circumstances in order to uncover resources which can assist in the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation and be universally significant for the rational and all-around development of human society. In order to achieve this goal, Confucianism should be renewed in order to make it a source of real spiritual wealth.

III


Output:
III

We may judge the value of learning from many perspectives, such as politics, economics, science and technology. Perhaps it is most important to make a philosophical judgment on the value of a school. Therefore, we must learn about the main problems faced by our society, nation, and mankind. These issues should be the starting point for considering philosophical questions.


Output: What are the main issues in contemporary human society? In my opinion, there are three: one is the relationship between man and nature, a conflict which is quite serious. The second is the relationship between man and man, including relationships between man and self (man and society), nation and nation, and people and people. The third problem is the relationship between body and mind. The biggest problem facing mankind is the conflict between man and nature, man and man (man and society), and the conflict within oneself. These issues are related to building a "harmonious society" and human society's "peaceful coexistence." In my opinion, the three philosophical propositions, "the unity of nature and man," "the unity of self and others" and "the unity of body and mind," can provide some valuable approaches and important philosophical resources to resolve the three conflicts. Of course, I do not mean that these problems can only be solved by Confucianism.


Output: As we enter the 21st century, we will see that the past century was a century of rapid development, a progressive century, but it was also a tragic century full of conflict and fighting. In one hundred years, there were two world wars, and more than a hundred million people died unnaturally due to war. Many cultural artifacts made by mankind several centuries ago were destroyed. China has experienced much suffering, but has also made great progress in the past one hundred years. In this process, we nearly completely negated our cultural tradition, and we refused to absorb some progressive Western cultures for a long time, too. It led to social problems, such as "a crisis of belief," "moral vacuum," "environmental pollution" and "money worship." How should we tackle these problems? I, and not only me, but other scholars, too, think that we can find philosophical resources from the past 5,000 years to deal with these problems. Many scholars have looked for answers to these problems. Of course, we should not


Output: to these problems. Of course, we should not think that thoughts and culture can solve all problems. If we think that thoughts and culture can tackle all problems, it will lead to "cultural determinism." Then it will be like the belief that science and technology can tackle human and social problems, leading to the trap of "the omnipotence of science," of "scientism." Therefore, when we discuss "the significance of Confucianism," we simply want to find resources and approaches which can be applied to contemporary human and social problems, and a way to deal with these problems.


Output: IV


Output: On the problem of "conflict between man and nature," in 1992, 1,575 scientists, including half the Nobel laureates, signed the "World Scientists' Warning to Humanity," which stated that human beings and the natural world are on a collision course. In my opinion, the warning signaled that human kind will encounter a serious crisis if the world continues as it is now. Advanced science and technology can benefit people, but as a part of nature, people not only control a lot of instruments to destroy nature, but also control weapons which can be used to destroy human beings in the process of conquering nature. The never-ending exploitation and destruction of nature results in consequences such as the waste of natural resources, the depletion of the ozone layer, the poisoning of the ocean, environmental pollution, the sudden and sharp growth in the human population, and ecological imbalance. The result is the destruction of "a harmonious nature" and "the harmonious relationship between man and nature,"


Output: harmonious relationship between man and nature," threatening conditions for human existence. These situations have a relationship with the subject-object dichotomy in Western philosophy. For instance, in A History of Western Philosophy , Russell said: "The philosophy of Descartes. . . it brought to completion, or very nearly to completion, the dualism of mind and matter which began with Plato and was developed, largely for religious reasons, by Christian philosophy. . . the Cartesian system presents two parallel but independent worlds, that of mind and that of matter, each of which can be studied without reference to the other" (Russell 1972, p. 567). It means that for a long time, spirit and matter have been regarded as independent and isolated in Western philosophy. Therefore, this kind of philosophy is established on an "external relationship" ("man" and "nature" are two unrelated factors), or it can be said that they regard "mind" and "matter" as two independent dual factors, and when Western


Output: as two independent dual factors, and when Western philosophers study one, they do not involve the other (but Western philosophy has changed, for instance, Whitehead criticizes the dualism in the traditional way of thinking in his Process Philosophy ). It means that Western thought involves the dualism of "subject-object" ("mind" and "matter," or "nature" and "man") from Plato in the Axial Age. But Chinese philosophy is different because it is based on "the unity of Heaven and man" (subject and object are connected and cannot be divided).


Output:
One of the origins of Chinese philosophy is Zhou Yi 周易 (The Book of Changes ). There is an important passage on the Bamboo Slips unearthed in Jingmen, Hubei Province, in 1993. It states (Jingmen 1998, Yucong yi 语丛一):

The Rituals describes the manners of intercourse.

The Music is used to enjoy or educate.

The Book of History is □□□□ [sic].

The Book of Odes is a collection of poems of the past and the present.

The Book of Changes is to communicate the Dao of nature and the Dao of man.

The Spring and Autumn Annals is a collection of affairs of the past and the present.


Output: These bamboo slips were written around 300 BC. They say that change communicates the Dao of nature and the Dao of man. It means that The Book of Changes studies the Dao of Heaven (law of Heaven or nature) and the Dao of man (order in society) and why they are connected through a comprehensive study of the subjects. That is, people in ancient times had already realized that they had to include "man" when studying "nature," and when studying "man," they had to involve "Heaven," too. This is "the unity of nature and man." In fact, this had already been revealed in Confucius' Analects . Zi Gong said: "I cannot hear Master Confucius' saying about nature and the Dao of nature" (Confucius 1980, Gongye Chang). Although Zi Gong had never heard Confucius speak about "nature and the Dao of nature," he brought forward this issue, which indicates that there was great interest in the relationship between "human nature" (man) and "the Dao of Heaven (nature)." When looking at the development of human society, people


Output: at the development of human society, people originally came across the relationship between "man" and "nature (Heaven)" because humans cannot live without "nature." Therefore, the ancient Chinese always paid attention to "the relationship between man and nature."


Output: Of course, there are various attitudes and methods to deal with "the relationship of man and nature." Some scholars held that man should comply with nature; some scholars thought that man should make use of "nature" to serve man, "know and apply nature to serve people"; and some scholars held that "both man and nature have their own laws and advantages." But the mainstream Confucian thinkers believed in "the unity of man and nature." The so-called "unity of man and nature" means that "nature" is inseparable from "man," and "man" is inseparable from "nature," too.


Output: Why is there such a belief? Well, it has a long history. We know that The Book of Changes was originally a fortune-telling book used to predict good or bad luck, and misfortune or good fortune. Who was asked to answer people's fortunes? " Tian " 天 (Heaven). "Man" asks "tian " about good or bad luck, and misfortune or good fortune. The Book of Changes recorded these answers, and so it became a book on the relationship between "Heaven" (tian ) and "man." Subsequently, various interpretations of this book formed a new one, that is, Yizhuan 易传 (The Appendices to the Book of Changes). Among them, The Appended Remarks in particular can be regarded as a philosophical interpretation of The Book of Changes . The Book of Changes solves the problem of the relationship between "Heaven" and "man," then what is the relationship between "Heaven" and "man"? The Appended Remarks answers this. It argues that The Book of Changes includes everything, and the book not only includes "the Dao of Heaven," "the Dao of earth," but


Output: "the Dao of Heaven," "the Dao of earth," but also includes "the Dao of man." Although "the Dao of Heaven" is manifested by yin and yang , "the Dao of earth" is presented as "hardness" and "softness," and "the Dao of man" is manifested as "benevolence" and "righteousness." The principle of the three is united, and the three are the manifestation of qian 乾 and kun 坤. The Confucian Zhang Zai in the Song Dynasty said: "Heaven, earth, and man all have the Dao of qian and kun . The Change penetrates in Heaven, earth, and man, and yin and yang are its substance (qi ), hardness and softness are its form, and benevolence and righteousness are its nature" (Zhang 1978, p. 235). From the example in The Book of Changes that unites Heaven (earth) and man, we can see that Heaven and man are a connected entity. The reason that " qian " and " kun " are used to describe the unity of "Heaven," "earth" and "man," is that " qian " denotes vigorous movement and " kun " denotes generosity and virtue in the Appendices to the Book


Output: and virtue in the Appendices to the Book of Changes. Therefore, "man" has a special responsibility for "Heaven and Earth" (Heaven). "Man" should know what is demanded by Heaven and Earth in the spirit of "constantly striving for self-improvement" and "with profound generosity to contain things or complete things." Zhang Zai said, "the Dao of Heaven" and "the Dao of man" is similar in the sense of "reason or truth." If we want to know the principle of being a man, we have to know the Dao of "Heaven and Earth," and if we know the truth of "Heaven and Earth," we can know the principle or law of "man" (society).


Output: Confucians in the Song Dynasty developed "the unity of nature and man." For instance, Cheng Yi said: "Is it allowable to know the Dao of man but do not know the Dao of nature? The Dao is one. Is it right if the Dao of man is one, and the Dao of nature is another one?" (Cheng 2004, Er Cheng Yishu , Vol. 18). According to the Confucian thinking, "nature" and "man" cannot be divided, and they cannot be regarded as an external and opposite relationship, and we cannot study only one of the two. Zhu Xi expressed this idea much clearer. He said: "Nature is man, and man is nature. At the beginning of human birth, they are produced from nature; and after the birth, nature is human, too" (Zhu 1990, Vol. 17). Zhu Xi held that "nature" cannot be independent of "man," and "man" cannot be independent of "nature." At the time of birth, humans come from nature, but when there is a human being, the Dao of "nature" (Heaven) is embodied by "man." In other words, "humans" are responsible for "nature." If there were no "humans,"


Output: for "nature." If there were no "humans," how would the lively atmosphere of "nature" be embodied, how would "the constantly striving to become stronger" of "nature" be embodied and how would "containing things or completing things with profound generosity" of the "earth" be embodied? So man should know that "the work to establish mind or heart for Heaven and Earth" and "the work to establish life for people" is the same and cannot be separated. Therefore, the Yucong yi of Guodian Zhujian 郭店竹简·语丛一 (Collection One of the Guodian Bamboo Slips for Writing ) said: "The Dao can be mastered after knowing what Heaven (nature) does and what man does. If we know the Dao , then we know what fate is" (Jingmen 1998). If we know "the Dao of nature (Heaven)" (the law of nature), and the Dao of man (the law of human society and life), then we can know the unified principle or reason for "nature or Heaven" and "man," and the development of "nature or Heaven" (the Dao of nature or Heaven) and "man" ("the Dao of man,"


Output: of nature or Heaven) and "man" ("the Dao of man," society). Confucius said: "It is necessary to know destiny or fate mandated by Heaven" (Confucius 1980, Weizheng). He means that "man" should know about "nature or Heaven." Confucius also said: "Man should have reverence for fate or destiny as mandated by Heaven or nature" (Ibid. , Jishi), and cannot randomly destroy the law of development of "nature or Heaven." A Chinese philosopher never regards "nature or Heaven" as a dead thing. Instead, it is organic, constantly developing, growing, and united with man as an entity. It is common sense that the existence of "man" cannot be separated from "nature or Heaven," but why does "man" regard "nature or Heaven" as an opposing object, and recklessly destroy and conquer "nature" ? It is because he regards the relationship between "nature" and "man" as external, and does not know that the relationship between "nature" and "man" is close and internal. "The internal relationship" is different from "the external


Output: relationship" is different from "the external relationship" because "the external relationship" denotes that "nature" and "man" are independent and unrelated. But "the internal relationship" denotes that "nature" and "man" have a close relationship. Therefore, "the unity of nature and man" is an ancient philosophical proposition in Chinese philosophy, and it is the cornerstone of Chinese Confucian thought as well as a proposition which needs to be continuously re-interpreted by human society. When we consider the problems of human beings and our relationship with nature, we should bear in mind the idea of "the unity of nature and man," and we must deepen our discussion of the close relationship between "nature" and "man." Human society has neglected the close relationship between "nature" and "man" for a long time, and so are we now being punished by nature? Why have we chosen a confrontational relationship with nature?


Output: The idea of "the unity of nature and man" (the thought, " yi 易(change) is to communicate the Dao of nature with the Dao of man"), which originated from The Book of Changes , supplies a way of thinking that resolves the current conflict between nature and man. It can inspire us in the following three aspects.


Output: Firstly, "the unity of nature and man" as a way of thinking says that people ought not to regard "man" as the opposite of "nature" because "man" is a part of "nature" and "the birth of man is from nature." Acts to destroy "nature" are the same as destroying "man," and "man" will be punished by "nature." Therefore, "man" should "know nature" (know nature in order to reasonably make use of nature) and should "revere nature" (revere nature and regard work to protect nature as a holy obligation). Now, we emphasize only "knowing nature" and blindly use "knowledge" to exploit and conquer "nature" and even destroy "nature." But man does not know that we should revere "nature." It is definitely an extreme manifestation of "scientism" (the omnipotence of science and technology). "Scientism" denies the holiness of "nature or Heaven," and consequently denies the transcendence of "nature or Heaven." Thus, humanist spirit loses its foundation. The Chinese thought of "the unity of nature and man" holds that "knowing


Output: "the unity of nature and man" holds that "knowing nature" is the same as "revering nature." If we "know nature" but do not "revere nature," we will regard "nature" as a dead thing, not knowing that it is organic, alive, and vigorous. "Revering nature" but not "knowing nature" leads man to regard "nature or Heaven" as a mystical power outside of "man," and does not help man gain the real favor of nature. "Knowing nature" is united with "revering nature," and it is an important manifestation of "the unity of nature and man," reflecting the inner obligation of "man" to "nature." The philosophical proposition, "the unity of nature and man," symbolizes the complicated relationship between "nature" and "man," which not only includes how "man" should understand "nature," but also that "man" should revere "nature" because of its holiness. This is the reason why Chinese Confucianism has not become a universal religion(like Buddhism and Christianity), but Confucianism possesses a certain "religiosity." Confucian


Output: possesses a certain "religiosity." Confucian thought has a religious function in China, that is, Confucians think that the "inner" morality of "man," which is mandated by "nature," needs moral cultivation to realize its "transcendence" as "transcendence from an ordinary person to the level of a sage." Therefore, "the unity of nature and man" is not only a recognition of "nature," but also a realm of life that "man" should pursue. The reason is that " tian "(nature, Heaven) does not just mean nature; it also means "Heaven" in the sense of holiness. "Human nature" should be asked to reach a transcendent sphere which is "equal to tian (Heaven, nature). In this sense, "man" and "nature" are not in opposition. Instead, "man" is united with "Heaven and Earth." For instance, Mencius said, "The people of the place where the superior man has visited will be influenced and educated; the impact at the place where the superior man has stayed is miraculous, and the sage acts along with Heaven and Earth" (Mencius 1980,


Output: acts along with Heaven and Earth" (Mencius 1980, Jinxin Shang). In this way, the superior man realizes personal transcendence. This way of thinking not only helps us get rid of the problem of "the division between Heaven and man" (the antagonism of Heaven and man), but also opens a way for human beings to attain the ideal human realm.


Output: Secondly, we cannot regard the relationship between "Heaven(nature)" and "man" as a kind of external relationship, because "Heaven is man, and man is Heaven" and so "Heaven" and "man" are inherently connected. "Man" cannot be separated from "Heaven," and "man" cannot survive without "Heaven"; "Heaven" cannot be separated from "man," without "man," the reason of "Heaven" cannot be embodied, and so who can realize "the Dao of Heaven"? Understanding the relationship between "Heaven" and "man" is a characteristic of Chinese philosophy. On this point, Wang Fuzhi made an important observation. He reviewed ancient scholars' theories and concluded that they had merely grasped the outer phenomena of the pre-Qin Confucianism, and thought that The Book of Changes was only about "the Dao of Heaven," but did not know that The Book of Changes had been the root or foundation of "the Dao of man" since the Han Dynasty (Wang 1975, Vol. 9, Qiancheng Shang). Zhou Dunyi's doctrine of " taiji picture" is about the root (origin)


Output: of " taiji picture" is about the root (origin) of "the unity of Heaven and man," which explains that the birth of man is the result of a change in "the Dao of Heaven." While changing into "the Dao of Heaven," Heaven gives its essential part to "man" and makes "man" possess "human nature," which is different from other things. Then, man can discover that all the principles of moral human relations of "the Dao of man" (the rules of human society) are in the order of the yin-yang movement of "the Dao of Heaven" (the law of the universe). "The Dao of man" and "the Dao of Heaven" should be united. "The Dao of man" is based on "the Dao of Heaven" because "man" is a part of Heaven (nature), so a discussion of "the Dao of man" cannot be separated from "the Dao of Heaven," and discussion of "the Dao of Heaven" must also take "the Dao of man" into consideration because "the principle of daily life and things" of "the Dao of man" is in the order of the yin-yang movement of "the Dao of Heaven." Zhang Zai said that the


Output: of "the Dao of Heaven." Zhang Zai said that the Book of Changes "contains the principle of Heaven, and also includes the Dao of man" (Zhang 1978, p. 65).


Output: Thirdly, why does Confucian philosophy hold that there is an "internal relationship" between "Heaven and man"? From the Western Zhou Dynasty, there is an intellectual tradition described as "the ear of Heaven is the ear of my people, and the eye of Heaven is the eye of my people" (Mencius 1980, Wanzhang Shang). The tradition can be traced from Confucius and Mencius to Cheng Hao, Cheng Yi, Zhu Xi, Lu Jiuyuan and Wang Yangming. On this point, Zhu Xi's saying reflects Confucius' consistency on "the learning of benevolence." He said: "The man of benevolence" "should have the heart to produce abundantly in the sense of nature, in sensing the heart of tender affection for man and beneficence for things; the benevolent man's heart includes four morals(benevolence, righteousness, rituals, and wisdom) and penetration into the four beginnings of the four morals" (Zhu 1936, Vol. 13). "The Dao of Heaven" continuously produces, and regards benevolence as the heart. "Heaven" (nature) can make myriad things grow well, so


Output: (nature) can make myriad things grow well, so "man" should follow the example of "Heaven" (nature), and show kindness to man and benefit myriad things. The reason is that "Heaven and man is united as a whole" and "man" obtains the essence of "Heaven" to become a "man," so man should realize the function of "nature" (Heaven) and "the tender affection for other man, and bring benefits to things." "The heart of Heaven" and "the heart of man" is actually the same heart. "Man" must realize "the Dao of Heaven" and sense "the Dao of Heaven." The value of life is to realize "the destiny (fate) of Heaven," so the relationship between "Heaven" and "man" is actually internal. We discuss the proposition of "the unity of Heaven and man" and understand it philosophically on the above points to see its real spirit and value. It is a kind of world view, a way of thinking that is applied to an interpretation of "the unity of Heaven and man." Its significance is that it endows "man" with an inescapable responsibility. "Man"


Output: "man" with an inescapable responsibility. "Man" can realize its own transcendence, and achieve the ideal "unity of Heaven and man" only in the process of "imitating Heaven(nature)" (enhancing to the sphere of "Heaven").


Output:
Of course, the Confucian idea of "unity of Heaven and man" probably cannot directly solve specific problems in human society's "conflicts between man and nature." However, as a philosophical proposition, the thought of "the unity of Heaven and man" holds that "Heaven" and "man" cannot be separated; instead, "Heaven" and "man" should be regarded as an inherent union. There is an internal communication between "Heaven" and "man," which undoubtedly provides a positive way of thinking for philosophically resolving the relationship between "Heaven" and "man."

V


Output: "The conflict between man and man" that exists in contemporary society is more complicated than "the conflict between man and nature." Interpersonal conflict is not only related to the various conflicts between "self and others," "man and community," "nation and nation," "people and people" and "region and region." For instance, the pursuit of material needs and power, the struggle for natural resources, and the expansion of possession and ambition cause conflict and war between nations, peoples, and regions, and lead to "imperial hegemony" and "terrorism." Excessive preoccupation with the pursuit of money and the enjoyment of material goods, especially the ruling class' corruption and their oppression of ordinary people, causes tensions in the relationships between people, a negative social atmosphere, numerous factions, and factionalism. In society, children, youth, and the aged all have their own problems. Misunderstandings and hostility in daily life, the isolation of souls, then lead to the dissolution


Output: isolation of souls, then lead to the dissolution of social harmony. This trend will result in the collapse of human society. Does Confucianism provide a helpful intellectual resource for contemporary society's faults? In my opinion, the Confucian "learning of benevolence" may have much significance for the formation of harmony "between man and man," between nations, peoples, and regions, or "harmonious society."


Output: The volume of " xing zi ming chu 性自命出 (nature coming out of fate)" in Guodian Zhujian says that " Dao originates from affection (feeling, emotion), and affection comes from nature. The beginning is close to affection, and the end is close to righteousness." It means that interpersonal relationships are initially founded on affection (feeling), and affection comes from human nature. Therefore, at the start of interpersonal relationships, affection is more important (such as the affection between a mother and child), and later on, morality and justice (Dao , or the way, and justice or righteousness) become more important than affection. Here, "the Dao " denotes "the Dao of man," which means the law of interpersonal relationships or principles of social relations. It is connected with "the Dao of Heaven," but different from "the Dao of Heaven," which means the law of nature (or the external world beyond "man"). " Dao originates from affection," meaning that interpersonal relationships are initially founded on


Output: relationships are initially founded on affection. It is the starting point of Confucius' "learning of benevolence." Confucius' disciple Fan Chi asked him what "benevolence" was, and Confucius answered, "to love people." Where does the moral command "to love people" come from? Zhongyong quotes Confucius: "Benevolence is the character of man, and it is foremost to love family" (Zisi 1980, Chapter 20). The moral character of benevolence is inborn, and it is essential to love one's own family. But Confucians think that the spirit of benevolence cannot just rest on the love of one's own family. The Guodian Zhujian says, "It is affection to love family sincerely, but benevolence is understood as a broad affection for ordinary people, not only affection for one's father" (Jingmen 1998). It is natural to have much love for one's own family; love (affection) that is extended to other people can be regarded as "benevolence." There is also the saying, "filial piety should be extended to affection for ordinary people


Output: be extended to affection for ordinary people under the sky" (Ibid., Tang yu zhi dao). However, affection for one's family is the foundation of affection for others. It means that the Confucian "learning of benevolence" requires an extension of the affection for one's family to the affection of ordinary people. The principle, "put oneself in the place of another," and the practice, "treat the aged with respect in my family, and extend that respect to the aged outside of my family; treat the young in my family with tenderness and then extend that tenderness to the young outside of my family" (Mencius 1980, Liang Huiwang Shang), reflect benevolence. It is not easy to abide by the principle "put oneself in the place of another." One must take "the Dao of zhong 忠 (the full development of one's original good mind) and shu 恕 (the extension of that mind to others)," described as "you do not do to others what you do not want them to do to you"(Confucius 1980, Yanyuan), "if you wish to establish your own character,


Output: "if you wish to establish your own character, also establish the character of others, and if you wish to be prominent, also help others to be prominent" (Ibid., Yongye), to be the principle for carrying out "benevolence." (Zhu Xi's Sishu Jizhu explains: "To realize one's good to the best is zhong , and the extension of one's good is shu .") If "benevolence" is extended to society (all human society), it is like Confucius' saying, "To master oneself and return to ritual is benevolence. If a man (the ruler) can for one day master himself and return to the rites(ceremony), all under Heaven will return to benevolence. To practice benevolence depends on oneself. Does it depend on others?" (Ibid., Yanyuan). In the past, "overcome selfish desire" and "revive the ritual" had always been explained as two parallel acts, but such an understanding is not correct in my opinion. Overcoming selfish desire and reviving the ritual are benevolence means that it is "benevolence" if "reviving the ritual" is based on "overcoming


Output: if "reviving the ritual" is based on "overcoming selfish desire." Fei Xiaotong explains this well. He said: "Only overcoming selfish desire, the ritual can be revived. To revive the ritual is a necessary condition for entry into society and becoming a social person. To limit one's selfish desire or to raise one's selfish desire may be the key difference between Western and Eastern cultures" (Fei 2002, p. 4). This is a reasonable explanation. If one enters society, he must require something of himself. For instance, he should ask himself to abide by the principle, "you do not do to others what you do not want them to do to you," then he can follow social criterion (the ritual) and become a social person. A nation is the same; it must abide by the requirements of the world "pact" and the general rules. Then the world pact and general rules can be preserved. Fei Xiaotong thought that "the restriction of selfish desire" in Chinese culture was good for interpersonal relationships, while "the encouragement of


Output: relationships, while "the encouragement of selfish desire" in Western culture, which placed the self above other persons or other nations, surely and easily led to conflict and war. According to Zhu Xi, the saying can be understood as "conquering selfish desire and returning to the rituals, which represent the principle of Heaven" (Zhu 1983). He means that we should restrict our own selfish desire in order to conform to rituals and criterion in our behaviors and actions. "Benevolence" is man's innate characteristic ("affection is originated from nature"); in the sense of social life, "the ritual (ceremony)" is the external system which regulates people's behavior, and its function is to regulate interpersonal relationships in order to ensure harmony. It symbolizes that "the importance of the use of rites (ceremony) is harmony." Demanding that people obey the ritual (ceremony) must be based on their internal heart (mind) of "the affection for others," which conforms to "benevolence." Confucius says: "To


Output: conforms to "benevolence." Confucius says: "To practice benevolence depends on oneself. Does it depend on others?"(Confucius 1980, Yanyuan). On the relationship between "benevolence"and "rites (ceremony)," Confucius clearly said: "If a man is not benevolent, what has he to do with rites (ceremonies, etc.)? If he is not benevolent, what has he to do with music?" (Ibid., Bayi). Without the heart (mind) of benevolence, the system of rites (ceremony) and music is deceptive, and is for cheating. Therefore, Confucius held that society can be harmonious and peaceful if people consciously pursue "benevolence," base "the heart(mind) of benevolence" on certain criterion, and put it into practice in daily society. This is the meaning of the saying "if a man (the ruler) can for one day control himself and return to the rites (ceremony), all under Heaven will return to benevolence" (Ibid., Yanyuan). The action of pursuing benevolence in daily practice is similar to "seeking to reach the greatest height and brilliancy and


Output: to reach the greatest height and brilliancy and follow the Dao of the Mean" in Zhongyong . "Seeking to reach the greatest height and brilliancy" (Zisi 1980, Chapter 27) means that people should pursue the highest principle, the ideal of benevolence, in life; "To follow the Dao of the Mean" asks people to realize the spirit of "benevolence" in daily life ("the doctrine of the mean, denotes the use of the mean.") "Seeking to reach the greatest height and brilliancy" and "to follow the Dao of the Mean" cannot be separated into two parts, and "the Dao of sageliness within and kingliness without" is the highest Confucian ideal. Today, we are trying to build a harmonious society, so Confucius' sayings are very important. There are many explanations of "benevolence" in the Confucius Analects , but there are no words for "benevolent governance." However, "to lead the people with virtue and regulate them by the rules of ceremonies (rites, property)," "to love people widely," "to elect the virtuous and able talents,"


Output: "to elect the virtuous and able talents," "to extensively bring benefit to the people and bring salvation to all" etc. are all about "benevolent governance." There are many discussions of "benevolent governance" in Mencius , and the meaning of "benevolent governance" is broad. Some of the explanations are not compatible with the needs of contemporary human society, but two of them are important in helping us to build a harmonious society and achieve world peace. One is that "the practice of benevolent government" should ensure people to have fixed property. Mencius said: "The people follow the right Dao , because they have fixed property and stable hearts, and without fixed property, there cannot be stable hearts" (Mencius 1980, Teng Wengong Shang). He means that ordinary people should have some fixed property in order to ensure that they have certain moral and behavioral principles. Without fixed property, a person will not have moral ideas and behavioral guidelines. Mencius said: "Benevolent governance


Output: guidelines. Mencius said: "Benevolent governance should start with the private ownership of land" (Ibid.). He means that a benevolent government should ensure that ordinary people have their own land first. I believe that we must ensure that ordinary people have some fixed property if we truly want to build a harmonious society. At the international level, every nation and people should possess the wealth that they deserve; powerful nations should not exploit other nations' wealth and resources or pursue power politics. The second point of Mencius' "benevolent governance" opposes unjust war. He said, "Those who carry out the kind and right Dao will gain more support; otherwise, others will find scant support who lose the kind and right Dao ." Here, "the Dao " means "morality and justice." In Gongsun Chou Xia there is a passage saying that favorable weather is less important than advantageous terrain, and advantageous terrain is less important than the support of the people. It reads:


Output: It is not needed to confine civilians by a national boundary, not necessary to protect a nation with a dangerous mountain, and to threaten the world by the weapons of destruction. Those who carry out the kind and right Dao will gain more support. Others who give up the kind and right Dao will find scant support. He who has the least support, his family and relatives will all oppose him, and all the people under the sky will come and pledge allegiance to he who has the most support. The just superior man will win if he launches a war against those who are opposed by all supporting forces, even by his family and relatives, or he need not launch the war (Mencius 1980, Gongsun Chou Xia).


Output: The passage tells us that it is not necessary to have national boundaries to restrict civilians, to depend on advantageous terrain to protect a nation, and to rely on weapons of mass destruction to threaten the world. Confucians usually divide war into two kinds: "the just war" and "the unjust war." Mencius says, "there is no just war in the Spring and Autumn Period" (Ibid., Jinxin Xia), and "those who lose public support will lose the regime" (Ibid., Lilou Shang). This idea also applies to the ruler of a nation. In the early Han Dynasty, Jia Yi wrote an article, Guo Qin Lun 过秦论 (An analysis of the fall of the Qin Dynasty). In his article, he concluded that the Qin Dynasty fell because "the Qin government did not carry out the policy of benevolence and righteousness after it had established a united nation, so it lost sovereignty even though it had taken over national power and had many advantages" (Jia 1989, Vol. 1). He quoted the proverb, "the past events are today's lesson." Isn't that the wisdom we


Output: are today's lesson." Isn't that the wisdom we should absorb today? Such Confucian thoughts should have some meaning to the rulers of a nation and for the ruling group of the world's developed nations. "Manage state affairs and pacify the world" for "benevolent governance" and "the Dao of kingliness," instead of "arbitrariness" and oppression.


Output: Since Samuel P. Huntington presented his thesis on the conflict of civilizations in 1993, it has been hotly debated by scholars from all countries. In human history, it is not uncommon to find conflicts and war caused by cultural differences (for instance, differences in philosophy, religion, values). Having entered the 21st century, there is no world war, but regional wars frequently break out between nations, peoples, and regions, with political and economical problems being important reasons, but culture is also an important reason. To resolve conflicts and even wars due to cultural differences, perhaps Confucius' notion of "harmony without sameness" might be a very important principle.


Output: In Chinese history, there are two concepts, " he 和 (harmony)" and "tong 同 (sameness)," which are regarded as different, so there is the so-called "discrimination of harmony and sameness." According to the records on Zhaogong ershi nian of Zuozhuan 左传·昭公二十年 (the 20th year of the Duke Zhao, Zuozhuan ), "Duke Zhao asked, 'Is only Liang Qiuju harmonious with me?' Yanzi (Yan Ying) answered, 'Ju is the same as you. Is it harmonious with you?' The Duke said, 'Is harmony different from sameness?' Yan answered, 'It is different. It is like cooking a thick soup, which needs water, fire, vinegar, catsup, salt, and plum to cook fish or meat, firewood to burn, and then the cook will get it seasoned to assure a fine taste. If the taste is too mild, the cook will add seasoning, and if the taste is too thick, he will add water to dilute the taste. When the superior man has the soup, he will find it delicious. The relationship between the emperor and his officials is alike. . . . Now Ju is different, because he always agrees


Output: . . Now Ju is different, because he always agrees with you no matter what decisions you make. It is like adding water to improve the flavor of water. Who would want this? If musical instruments always play the same tone, who would listen to it? This is why sameness should not be advocated'" (Zuo 1980, Zhaogong ershi nian). In Zhengyu of Guoyu 国语·郑语, "The harmonious relationship between things is helpful to produce new things, while sameness cannot. To add one with another is called harmony, so it can create something new; while if the same things are put together, all will lose their vital force. So the past kings used earth, metal, wood, water, and fire to produce the myriad things" (Zuo 1997, Vol. 16). Therefore, "harmony" and "sameness" are not the same. If different and related things can harmoniously grow, then things will develop. If the same things are put together, the result is the suppression of vital force. The highest ideal in traditional Chinese culture is "ten thousand things grow together


Output: culture is "ten thousand things grow together without harming each other; their Dao move in parallel without mutual interference" (Zisi 1980, Chapter 30).("Ten thousand things growing together" with "their Dao moving in parallel" expresses a "lack of sameness"; "they do not damage" or "interfere with each other"—this is "harmony.") This can be a rich source of ideas for the coexistence of many cultures.


Output: Different nations and countries should have cultural exchanges and dialogue in order to achieve a common understanding, that is, a process of mutual recognition from difference to a sense of commonality. This kind of mutual recognition does not mean that one side exterminates the other or that one side is completely assimilated by another. It means the search for junctures where different cultures can come together and develop. This is harmony. Therefore, we must diligently strive for harmonious coexistence among different cultures through dialogue. Now, many scholars in China and the West have recognized the importance of pursuing mutual understanding among different cultures through dialogue. For instance, Habermas puts forward the notions of "justice" and "solidarity" (Habermas 1996). I think these should be used as principles in the relationship between different nations and cultures. Habermas' "principle of justice" can be understood as that every national culture should be independent and


Output: every national culture should be independent and self-determining; the "principle of solidarity" can be understood as that one nation should regard other national cultures with a sympathetic attitude and respect other cultures. Only through continuous dialogue and communication and other means can good communication between different national cultures be established. The German philosopher Gadamer pointed out that "understanding" should be extended to a "broad dialogue" (Pan 2002, pp. 65-68). It is to increase "understanding" to the level of "broad dialogue," then the subject and object can become equal. In other words, dialogue can only be truly carried out under the condition of mutual equality. It can be said that Gadamer's consciousness of subject-object equality and his theory on cultural dialogue are important and necessary ideas for our age. The idea is in inspiration for us to correctly understand Sino-foreign cultural relationships and national relationships. Habermas' principles of justice and


Output: Habermas' principles of justice and solidarity and Gadamer's theory of broad dialogue both recognize, as their premise, the need for harmony without sameness. It is only if we recognize that nations and states with different cultural traditions can achieve harmonious coexistence will it be possible for them to have equal rights and duties; it is only under such conditions that "broad dialogue" can truly and smoothly accomplish its ends. Thus, Confucius' principle of "harmony without sameness," based on the notion that harmony is valuable, should become a basic principle for handling relations between different cultures.


Output: VI


Output: If we use the Confucian notion of "the unity of Heaven and man" as a philosophical resource to resolve "the contradictions between man and nature" and "the unity of self and others" to resolve "the contradictions among men," we may then use the "integration of the inner and the outer" to moderate the contradictions within ourselves. There are pressures in modern society. In particular, the unlimited pursuit of sensual pleasure results in psychological imbalance and a split in the human personality. Psychological imbalance induces spiritual disturbances, alcoholism, murder, suicide, etc. This distortion of the human body and mind has become a social disease that seriously affects social peace. The reason for this is the withering of morality; people no longer have a sense of harmony between body and mind. Many perceptive scholars have proposed theories and policies about how to cure the disease. In traditional Chinese culture, much attention has been given to this in the Confucian practice of cultivating the


Output: this in the Confucian practice of cultivating the person and nurturing the mind. Xing Zi Ming Chu in Guodian Zhujian says: "if you intend to know the Dao , you should return to the innate goodness within yourself, it is called moral cultivation" (Jingmen 1998). Daxue 大学 (The Great Learning ) stresses that people's moral practice is important to building a harmonious society. In the first chapter of the book, it says: "The Dao of learning to be great consists in manifesting the clear character, renovating the people, and abiding (staying, resting) in the highest good" (Zeng 1980, Chapter 1). Zhu Xi commented, "the word, renovate, means remove from old. And if I am clear about myself and clean, I should help others to abolish the former pollution in the similar way as mine. . . To manifest the clear character and renovate, people should stay at the highest good and not change" (Zhu 1983, Daxue). The purpose of showing a clear character and shaping the people is to reach the highest good and achieve man's


Output: is to reach the highest good and achieve man's highest realm. Therefore, The Great Learning holds that "From the Son of Heaven to common civilians, all must regard moral cultivation as the root or foundation. There has never been a case when the root is in disorder and the branches are all in order" (Zeng 1980, Chapter 1). It means that according to Confucianism, if everyone (from the Son of Heaven to common people) cultivated their morality well, "family" could be regulated, "state" will be in order, and there will be peace throughout the "world." Or if moral cultivation, the root or foundation, is disordered, it is definitely impossible to manage "family," "state" and the "world" well. In the Doctrine of the Mean , "Social governance depends on man, the choice should be made according to their moral cultivation, the standard of moral cultivation is the Dao (the top Dao , harmony), and the heart(mind) of benevolence and love is necessary for realizing a harmonious society" (Zisi 1980, Chapter 20). Here, the


Output: society" (Zisi 1980, Chapter 20). Here, the connection of an individual's moral cultivation to "benevolence" proves the consistency of Confucian thought. Confucianism's attention to "moral cultivation" is not aimless; instead, it is to regulate family, govern the nation, and unite the world, that is, to build a "harmonious society." The ideal of the commonwealth of great unity in the Records of Rites is aimed at building a harmonious society politically, economically, and culturally. Confucianism's ideal of a harmonious society is based on personal moral cultivation, so Confucians lay particular emphasis on personal cultivation of the body and mind. Confucians think that life and death, riches and honor should not be the final life goal, and people should pursue moral perfection and knowledge. Confucius said: "I am uneasy that people do not cultivate their moral character, do not learn and teach knowledge, do not behave according to righteousness, and do not correct their mistakes although they know they are


Output: their mistakes although they know they are wrong" (Confucius 1980, Shuer). This tells us the reason for being a man. It is not easy to cultivate our moral character unless we have great dreams and the willingness to improve the welfare of humankind. It is also not easy to study knowledge because we not only need to improve our own wisdom, but also need to show culture and education to society. People always make mistakes, but we should have the courage to correct our mistakes, benefiting social harmony. "Be apt to goodness" means that we should strive in the direction of goodness everyday, improve ourselves day to day, and then we can reach the state of being in the highest good. All of the above are reasons to be an upright person, as advocated by Confucianism, and they are necessary for maintaining harmony between the body and the mind, the inner and the outer. Mencius said: "To preserve one's mind and nourish one's nature is the way to serve Heaven. Not to allow any double-mindedness regardless of


Output: Not to allow any double-mindedness regardless of longevity or brevity of life, but to cultivate one's person and wait for ming 命 (destiny, fate, Heaven's decree or mandate) to take its own course is the way to fulfill one's destiny" (Mencius 1980, Jinxin Shang). If one can preserve his compassionate heart and cultivate his moral character to realize the Dao of Heaven, then the length of one's life does not matter. But he must be sure of being conform to the Dao of Heaven through individual moral cultivation. It is one's peace and calmness and the establishment of destiny.


Output: Confucian self-cultivation has a goal. The Book of Changes says, "Make use of personal moral cultivation in order to honor virtue" (Zhouyi , Xici Xia). People's actions should benefit society, and this should be their main pursuit. An individual undergoes self-cultivation in order to elevate his spirit and "set his mind on Heaven and Earth, establish his life's destiny, and continue to study to achieve sage, so that all things in the world are at peace" (Zhang 1978, p. 320). This is to "establish the great root or foundation and so carry out the Dao ." What the Confucians in the Song Dynasty pursued is that, as far as an individual is concerned, he will be at peace with himself both in his inner thoughts and emotions and in his external relations. In A Letter to Zhang Jingfu , when Zhu Xi discussed "the meaning of the mean and harmony" with Jingfu, he said: "From now on, I know I have a safe place, that is, the place for the peace and calmness of a person, the establishment of destiny, and for the domination


Output: establishment of destiny, and for the domination of consciousness in the vast transformation of the universe. So the key for us to establish our big root (foundation) and carry out the great Dao is described as that substance and function have one source and there is no gap between the apparent and the hidden" (Zhu 1936, Vol. 10). Confucians hold that it is very important for a person to find peace and calmness, and to establish his destiny for the harmony of body and mind, inner thoughts and emotion, and external factors. Therefore, Zhu Xi said: "If a person can be harmoniously centered within himself, even though the world at large is in chaos, the inner world, its Heaven and Earth and the myriad things, remains peaceful and unharmed. If someone is unable to attain this, even though there is order in the world at large, within oneself one will be perturbed, even if no harm comes to him from without. It's the same for a country or a family" (Ibid.). If our internal and external beings are harmonious, the


Output: internal and external beings are harmonious, the chaos of a disordered world cannot disturb our inner peace. If we are not centered and harmonious in our internal and external beings, even if there is a very well-ordered world outside, we will still be troubled, worried, or perturbed. We must work hard at cultivating our own virtue whether the world at large is in chaos or in order. In this way, we can fulfill our life's duty and when it is time to leave the world, we can go with a sense of peace and fulfillment. Thus, the last two sentences in Zhang Zai's Ximing 西铭 (Western Inscription ) says: "In life I fulfill my duty as a member of society and as a member of the universe, and when death comes, I rest" (Zhang 1978, p. 63).


Output: Confucians consistently give much attention to an individual's peace and calmness and the establishment of destiny. This comes from selfcultivation. In this way, we can bring harmony to our own hearts and minds and to our internal world and its external manifestations. Our words and actions conform to the "principle of being human." And in this way, our persons will be at peace and our destiny established. We should remove all obstacles in the way of our personal harmony. Zeng Zi says: "Everyday I examine myself on three points: whether in counseling others I have not been loyal; whether in intercourse with my friends I have not been faithful; and whether I have not repeated again and again and practiced the instructions of my teacher" (Chan 1963, p. 20). As a man of honor, everyday one should be aware of himself and examine whether his behavior and actions are moral and just. If there is something immoral and unjust, he should sacrifice his life to realize humanity and defend justice. Confucius said, "A


Output: humanity and defend justice. Confucius said, "A resolute scholar and a man of humanity will never seek to live at the expense of injuring humanity. He would rather sacrifice his life in order to realize humanity" (Confucius 1980, Weiling Gong). Mencius said: "If I do not act according to humanity and justice, I choose self-abandonment"(Mencius 1980, Lilou Shang). It is not easy to carry out the Confucians' "principle of being human," but this is something people should ardently strive for. And the purpose of achieving this personal peace is to bring about social harmony.


Output: Sima Qian says: "For one to make a record of the Dao of the ancients today is to make a mirror for ourselves; it is not that the two ages are necessarily identical in all things" (Sima 1997, Vol. 18). We have been reviewing the thoughts of Confucius and his school in order to search for resources that human society today can use. This is undoubtedly important. But the thoughts and ideas of the sages and worthies of ancient times are not fully able to solve all the problems of the present time; nor do they all accord with the demands of contemporary society. They can only show us a path for thinking, hints on how to make use of these resources, giving us a new foundation for addressing the concerns of the present time. It is in this way that they contribute to building a harmonious human society. "Though Zhou is an ancient state, its Mandate is ever-new" (Shi Jing , Daya). Our Chinese nation is an ancient nation with 5,000 years of history and culture. Our mission is to assure that our society constantly


Output: mission is to assure that our society constantly revitalizes itself and makes contributions to all mankind.


Output:
References

Chen Zhanbiao. Ruxue "Disici Langchao": Jibian Rujiao 儒学“第四次浪潮”：激辩儒教 ("The Fourth Wave" of Confucianism: Sharp Debate on Confucianism). Shehui Kexue Bao, Feb. 23, 2006.

Cheng Hao, Cheng Yi. Er Cheng Ji 二程集 (The Collected Works of Brothers Cheng). Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju, 2004.

Confucius. Lunyu 论语 (Analects ). In Shisan Jing Zhushu 十三经注疏 (Comments to the Thirteen Classics ). Ed. Ruan Yuan. Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju, 1980.

Fei Xiaotong. Zhongguo Wenhua de Qiantu 中国文化的前途 (The Prospect of Chinese Culture). Shehui Kexue Bao, Jun. 6, 2002.

Fei Xiaotong. Fei Xiaotong Lun Wenhua yu Wenhua Zijue 费孝通论文化与文化自觉 (Fei Xiaotong's Theory on Culture and Cultural Self- Consciousness ). Beijing: Qunyan Chubanshe, 2005.

Habermas, Jürgen. Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press, 1996.

Han Yu. Han Changli Quanji 韩昌黎全集 (The Complete Works of Han Changli ). Beijing: Zhongguo Shudian, 1991.


Output:
Huntington, Samuel P. The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2003.

Jaspers, Karl. The Origin and Goal of History . New Haven, CT.: Yale University Press, 1953.

Jia Yi. Xinshu 新书 (New Book ). Shanghai: Shanghai Guji Chubanshe, 1989.

Jiang Qiong. Lun Zhongguo Rujiao de Chongjian 论中国儒教的重建 (On the Reconstruction of Chinese Confucianism). Zhongguo Rujiao Yanjiu 中国儒教研究 (Chinese Confucianism Research Journal ), Vol. 1, 2005.

Jingmen Museum. Guodian Zhujian 郭店竹简 (Bamboo Slips in Jingmen, Hubei Province). Beijing: Wenwu Chubanshe, 1998.

Mencius. Mengzi 孟子 (Mencius). In Shisan Jing Zhushu 十三经注疏 (Comments to the Thirteen Classics ). Ed. Ruan Yuan. Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju, 1980．

Pan Derong. Gadamer de Zhexue Yichan 加达默尔的哲学遗产 (Gadamer's Philosophical Heritage ). Hong Kong: Ershiyi Shiji , April 2002.

Russell, Bertrand. The Problem of China . New York: The Century Co., 1922.

Russell, Bertrand. A History of Western Philosophy. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1972.


Output:
Shijing 诗经 (Book of Songs ). In Shisan Jing Zhushu 十三经注疏 (Comments to the Thirteen Classics). Ed. Ruan Yuan. Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju, 1980.

Sima Qian. Shiji 史记 (Records of the Grand Historian of China ). Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju, 1997.

Tu Weiming. Tu Weiming Wenji 杜维明文集 (The Collected Works of Tu Weiming ), Vol. 5. Wuhan: Wuhan Chubanshe, 2002.

Wang Fuzhi. Zhangzi Zhengmeng Zhu 张子正蒙注 (Annotations on the Zhengmeng of Master Zhang ). Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju, 1975.

Zeng Can. Daxue 大学 (The Great Learning). In Shisan Jing Zhushu 十三经注疏 (Comments to the Thirteen Classics ). Ed. Ruan Yuan. Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju, 1980.

Zhang Zai. Zhang Zai Ji 张载集 (The Collected Works of Zhang Zai ). Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju, 1978.

Zhu Xi. Zhuzi Yulei 朱子语类 (Topically Arranged Conversations of Master Zhu ). Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju, 1990.

Zhu Xi. Zhuzi Wenji 朱子文集 (Collected Works of Zhu Xi). Shanghai: Shangwu Yinshuguan, 1936.

Zhu Xi. Sishu Zhangju Jizhu 四书章句集注 (Variorum of the Four Books ). Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju, 1983.


Output:
Zhou Gong. Zhouli 周礼 (Book of Rites ). In Shisan Jing Zhushu 十三经注疏(Comments to the Thirteen Classics). Ed. Ruan Yuan. Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju, 1980.

Zisi. Zhongyong 中庸 (The Doctrine of the Mean). In Shisan Jing Zhushu 十三经注疏 (Comments to the Thirteen Classics ). Ed. Ruan Yuan. Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju, 1980.

Zuo Qiuming. Zuo Zhuan 左传 (Zuo Qiuming Edition of the Spring and Autumn Annals ). In Shisan Jing Zhushu 十三经注疏 (Comments to the Thirteen Classics). Ed. Ruan Yuan. Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju, 1980.

Zuo Qiuming. Guoyu 国语 (National Words ). Shenyang: Liaoning Jiaoyu Chubanshe, 1997.

叁　儒学的现代意义 *

一


Output:
叁　儒学的现代意义 *

一

《儒学的现代意义》这个题目，我曾讲过多次，上世纪80年代讲过，90年代也讲过，现在到21世纪还讲。不仅我讲，而且越来越多的学者都在讲，为什么今天我们要讲？我想，有两个重要的原因：一是我们中华民族正处在伟大的民族复兴的前夜，在此时此刻，我们必须回顾我们的历史文化传统。雅斯贝尔斯（1883—1969）曾提出“轴心时代”的观念。他认为，在公元前500年前后，在古希腊、以色列、印度和中国等地几乎同时出现了伟大的思想家，他们都对人类关切的根本问题提出了独到的看法。古希腊有苏格拉底、柏拉图，以色列有犹太教的先知们，印度有释迦牟尼，中国有老子、孔子等等，形成了不同的文化传统。这些文化传统经过两千多年的发展，已经成为人类文明的主要精神财富，而这些地域的不同文化，原来都是独立发展出来的，最初并没有互相影响。“人类一直靠轴心期所产生、思考和创造的一切而生存。每一次新的飞跃都回顾这一时期，并被它重燃火焰。自那以后，情况就是这样。轴心期潜力的苏醒和对轴心期潜力的回忆，或曰复兴，总是提供了精神动力。对这一开端的复归是中国、印度和西方不断发生的事情。” 1 例如，欧洲的文艺复兴就是把目光投向其文化的源头古希腊，使欧洲文明重新发出新的光辉，而对世界产生重大影响。中国的宋明理学（新儒学）在印度佛教文化冲击之后，再次回到孔孟而把中国文化提高到一个新的阶段。在这踏入新千年之际，世界思想界已出现对于“新的轴心时代”的呼唤，这就要求我们更加重视对古代思想智慧的温习与发掘，回顾我们文化发展的源头，以响应世界文化发展的新局面。二是在新的世纪，我们的国家提出建设“和谐社会”的要求之际，费孝通先生提出“文化自觉”的问题。也就是说，我们要建设“和谐社会”也必有个对自身“文化”上的自觉。什么是“文化自觉”？费孝通先生在《人文价值再思考》中说：

文化自觉只是指生活在一定文化中人们对其文化有“自知之明”，明白它的来历、形成过程，所具有的特色和它发展的趋向，不带任何“文化回归”的意思，不是要“复古”，同时也不主张“全盘西化”或“全盘他化”。自知之明是为了加强对文化转型的自主能力，取得决定适应新环境、新时代文化选择的自主地位。


Output:
这就是说，在我们建设“和谐社会”的伟大历史时期，我们必须有“文化自觉”，要确立“文化”上的自主地位。我们的文化上的自主地位，既不是“复古”，也不是“全盘西化”，而是要使我们自身文化的根基牢固，根深才可以叶茂，必须坚持文化自主性，并且也要充分吸收其他各民族的文化滋养我们自身。

在这种情况下，来研究我们民族文化的历史和它发展的前景，就必须适应当代世界文化发展的新形势，即“新的轴心时代”到来的文化发展的新形势；就必须适应我们国家建设“和谐社会”的目标，而必须有一个文化自觉的要求。那么在这样一个新的历史时期，全人类社会和我们自己的社会，到底遇到了什么问题，我们需要努力解决什么问题，才能促使“新的轴心时代”和我们的“和谐社会”早日到来呢？

二

进入21世纪，可以说在我们国家出现了“国学热”的情况。对这种情况存在着各种各样不同的看法和解释。所谓“国学”最早见于《周礼·春官·乐师》：“掌管国学之政，以教国子小舞。”意思是说：乐师的职责是管理国学的事务，这个国学事务是教国子的音乐舞蹈的。但是现在我们说的“国学”是对“西学”而言。这是由于，我们面对“西学”的输入，如何保护和发展我们的传统文化，也就是说：中国文化的发展面对着双重任务，一是要保护自身文化，维护我们自身文化发展的根基；二是如何对待和吸收、消化“西方”文化，这就形成了百多年来文化上的“中西古今”之争。而在这个全球化的时代，我们必须走出“中西古今”之争，会通“中西古今”之学，以实现不同文化之间的共存共荣。

对“国学”，特别是“儒学”，现在学术文化界有种种的看法，我简单作点介绍：

1．有的学者提出“重建中国儒教的构想”：他们认为“必须全方位的复兴儒教，以应对西方文明的全方位的挑战”，“复兴儒教是复兴中华文化重建中华文明的当务之急”。因此，主张把儒教立为国教，在我们国家实现所谓的自古以来的“政教合一” 2 。

2．对这种观点来自两个方面的批评：一是来自“自由主义派”，他们认为，“儒教救国论”是对当代民主政治的反动，是对“平等”观念的践踏。把“儒教”立为“国教”会让中国成为一个儒教的伊朗，“企图将儒教意识形态化，为专制主义服务” 3 。另一是来自马克思主义学者的批判，他们认为：“儒教救世的想象实质是道德作用的自我夸大”，也是“以天道性命的形上学来追求王道政治，这样只能重踏封建专制的陷阱”，“真正的救世主只能是马克思主义” 4 。


Output:
3．还有一些学者从维护和发扬儒家思想出发，对“儒学”作充分的肯定，例如现代新儒家认为内圣之学可以开发出适合现代民主政治的“外王之道”，而且认为儒家的“心性之学”（所谓“良知的坎陷”）可以发展出认识论的系统。也还有认为，“三纲五常”仍有其价值。1994年杭州会议上，杜维明放弃了认为“三纲”有价值的看法，而“五常”还有价值，这是他的一个改变。还有关于“文化中国”的问题，杜维明提出这一想法，对中国文化走向世界有其意义，但他把“文化中国”分成若干圈，核心圈为“大陆”“台湾”等；第二圈为海外华人；第三圈为受中国文化影响的各国；第四圈是研究和欣赏中国文化的外国人等等。但他有个观点是可讨论的，他说：“文化中国的范畴很广，有一批与中国没有血缘关系，但对中国人影响很大的，也是文化中国的一部分，像释迦牟尼，马克思等。”这也许很成问题。如此类推，可以有“文化欧洲”“文化美国”，而中国的思想家，如孔、孟、老、庄等等，在他们那里有影响，也就是他们的一部分。

4．当然还有一些学者认为，孔子的儒家学说在五四时期已被否定，今天再把它推崇到至高的地位，无疑是历史的倒退等等。

到底对儒家思想应如何看，这是仁者见仁，智者见智的问题，今天对它有多种看法，说明我们的社会在进步，因为学术文化问题只能在自由讨论、在贯彻“百家争鸣”的方针中实现，在不断的理性的对话中前进。


Output:
当然，我自己对“儒学”也有自己的看法，是否对，要在讨论中得到检验，它也只是众多之家的一家之言。对于学术文化，我有几点根本的看法：第一，任何历史上的思想文化没有绝对正确的，其自身往往包含着内在矛盾，儒学也是一样；因此，“儒学”必然有某些方面有其历史的局限性，不可能都适合现代社会生活的要求。即使是其中具有普适意义的精粹部分也往往要给以现代的诠释。第二，虽然思想文化是在不断发展的，但是，古代哲学家提出的哲学问题和他们的哲学思考并非都不如我们今天，有些问题很可能是万古常新的，例如中国哲学中讨论的“天人关系”（人与自然关系）的问题，仍然是我们现代中国哲学讨论的主题之一。第三，罗素说：“不同文明之间的交流，过去已经多次证明，是人类文明的发展的里程碑。”任何文化要在历史长河中不断发展，必须不断地吸收其他民族的文化，在相互交流中才能适时地发展，特别是在今天全球化时代。从我国历史上看，印度佛教的传入已经证明这一点。中国文化曾受惠于印度佛教，印度佛教又在中国得到发扬光大，后为中国文化所吸收，而深刻地影响了宋明理学。今天，在全球化的形势下，我们必须充分地系统地吸收和消化西方文化和其他各民族的文化，当然是他们的优秀文化，中国学术文化才能适应人类社会要求和我们民族自身的新发展。因此我们的文化必须是民族的又是世界的。第四，要有文化的主体性，任何一个民族文化必须扎根在自身文化的土壤中，只有对自身文化有充分理解和认识，保护和发扬，它才能适应自身社会合理、健康发展的要求，它才有深厚的吸收其他民族的文化的能力。一个没有能力坚持自身文化的自主性，也就没有能力吸收其他民族的文化以丰富和发展其自身的文化，它将或被消灭，或全盘同化。

基于以上看法，我认为，要对“儒学”进行分析，也许可以从不同角度来看待它。我们可否从三个角度来看“儒学”：一是政统的儒学，一是道统的儒学，一是学统的儒学。


Output:
儒学曾长期与中国历代政治结合在一起，无疑它对封建集权专制统治起过重要作用。在儒家思想中特别注重道德教化的作用，这虽有可取的一面，但却流于把道德的作用绝对化，而使中国一直是“人治社会”，而很难实现“法治社会”；而且很容易使政治道德化，而美化政治统治；又使道德政治化，使道德为政治服务。当然儒家思想中的某些政治哲学也对消解专制统治起限制作用，如“以德抗位”“民为贵”“诛一夫”（曰：“臣弑其君可乎？”曰：“贼仁者谓之贼，贼义者谓之残，残贼之人，谓之一夫。闻诛一夫纣矣，未闻弑君也。” 5 ）往往也可以用“天”来压制君权。“畏天命”，要对“天”有所敬畏，甚至“天人感应”在一定条件下，也可以起抑制“皇权”的作用，利用天降灾异，有臣子就上书警告皇帝，于是皇帝不得不下罪己诏。但总的说来儒学在历史上被政治利用起的消极作用更明显。特别是“愚忠”“吾皇圣明，臣罪当诛”，无论如何是不可取的。所以对儒学在受政治利用的情况下，问题较多。

“道统”的儒学：任何一个成系统有历史传承的学术文化派别，其学术文化的发展和影响，必有其传统，西方如此，中国也是如此，从中国历史上看有儒释道三家，都有其传统。因为有传统的学术文化它才能不断发展，儒家是更为自觉的继承着其传统，它以继承夏、商、周三代的文化传统为自任。“祖述尧舜，宪章文武。”因此，我们今天当然也应自觉地继承我们的文化传统。但是对自身“道统”的过分强调就可能形成对其他学术文化的排斥，而形成对“异端”思想的压制，而在历史上某些异端思想的出现，恰恰是对主流思想的冲击，甚至于颠覆，这将为新的思想开辟道路。儒家从总体上说，是比较有包容性的，如他们主张“万物并育而不相害，道并行而不相悖”，但有时也存在强烈的排他性，例如孟子的“拒杨墨”，批评杨朱和墨子“无父、无君”这就过分了。如韩愈的排佛，佛教在当时确有问题，浪费国家财力过大，但韩愈提出“人其人，火其书，庐其居”（让僧尼都还俗，佛经都烧掉，佛寺都改为民居），也有点过分吧！因此，派性过强不大好。


Output:
“学统”的儒学是指其学术传统，是指它的学术理念，也许在这方面，儒学的正面价值比较多，它可以为人类社会提供比较有意义的思想资源。在当前甚至以后，都不应把它意识形态化。学术最好归学术，不应依附于政治，不能定于一尊，要贯彻“百家争鸣”的方针。当然，我们对古来圣贤为我们提供的思想资源必须经过分析，并给以现代诠释，以揭示其既能对我们当前民族的伟大复兴、建设“和谐社会”提供有积极意义的思想资源，又能对全人类社会合理和全面的发展有普世意义，儒学必须“日日新，又日新”才能成为我们的真正精神财富。

三

对于一种学说作出价值判断，当然我们可以从多种角度来考虑，可以从政治的、经济的、科学技术的等等方面来考虑，但是也许最重要的应是对它的价值作哲学的判断。为此，我们必须了解我们的社会国家、当前全人类面临的重大问题，以此作为我们思考哲学问题的出发点。

当前人类社会存在的重大问题有什么？我想，归纳起来有三大问题：一是，人与自然的关系问题，目前人与自然的矛盾已发展到了十分严重的地步；二是，“人与人”之间关系的问题，这包括人我问题（人与社会）、国与国、民族与民族之间的问题；三是，人自身身心内外关系的问题。也就是说，当前人类遇到的最大问题就是人和自然的矛盾，人与人（人与社会）的矛盾，人自身的矛盾。而这三个问题应和我们建设“和谐社会”和当今人类社会的“和平共处”有着极为重要的关系。我认为，我国儒家的“天人合一”“人我合一”“身心合一”这三个哲学命题，也许可以说为我们解决上述三大矛盾提供了某些宝贵的思路和应该特别重视的思想资源。当然，我没有意思说，这些问题光靠儒家思想都可以解决。


Output:
在人类社会进入21世纪时，我们回头看看20世纪的历史，可以发现过去这个世纪是人类社会飞速发展的世纪，取得辉煌成就的世纪，但同时又是充满矛盾斗争的悲惨世纪。在这百年中，发生了两次世界大战，因战争非正常死亡的人何止几千万，大量破坏了人类多少世纪辛勤建造的文化遗产。而我们的国家，在百多年来经历了种种苦难，同时也取得了很大的进步。但在这个过程中由于种种原因，从文化上说在相当长的一个时期，我们对传统几乎全盘否定，而又拒绝吸收西方的某些先进文化，致使我们的社会出现了“信仰危机”“道德真空”“环境污染”“金钱拜物教盛行”等等，这些已经到了相当严重的地步，不能不引起世人高度重视。那么如何办？我想，不仅我这样想，而且许多学者都这样想，我们能不能从我们长达五千年的历史中发掘出解决这些问题的某些思想资源？许多学者在努力寻求。当然，必须注意，我们决不能认为思想文化可以解决一切问题，如果认为思想文化可以解决一切问题，就可能导致“文化决定论”，这就像认为科学技术可以解决人类社会问题一样，而导致“科学主义”的“科学万能”歧途。因此，我们讨论“儒学的现代意义”只是说，它有些什么样的资源和思路，可以对当前人类社会存在的问题给以某种可以思考的路径，给以一种为解决问题的提示方向。

四


Output:
四

关于“人和自然矛盾”的问题，1992年世界1575名科学家发表了一个《世界科学家对人类的警告》，在其开头就说，人类和自然正走上一条相互抵触的道路。我认为，这话深刻地认识到人类社会如果如此发展下去，将会遇到严重的危机。科学技术高度发达，虽然可以给人们造福，但作为自然的一部分的人，在他们征服自然的过程中，不仅掌握了大量破坏自然的工具，而且也掌握了毁灭人自身的武器。对自然界的无量的开发和破坏，资源的浪费，臭氧层变薄，海洋毒化，环境污染，人口暴涨，生态平衡的破坏，不仅造成“自然和谐”的破坏，而且破坏了“人与自然的和谐”，这些已严重地威胁着人类自身生存的条件。这种情况的存在，应该说和西方哲学“主—客”（认识的主体与认识的客体）二分的思维方式有关，正如罗素在《西方哲学史》中说：“笛卡尔的哲学……他完成了或者说几近完成了由柏拉图开端而主要因为宗教上的理由经基督教哲学发展起来的精神、物质二元论，……笛卡尔体系提出来精神界和物质界两个平行而彼此独立的世界，研究其中之一能够不牵涉另外一个。”这就是说，西方哲学长期把精神和物质看成是各自独立的，互不相干的，因此其哲学以“外在关系”（“人”和“自然”是互不相关的二元）立论，或者说其思维模式以“心”“物”为独立的二元，研究一个可以不牵涉另外一个。这就是说欧洲（西方）的思维模式从轴心时代的柏拉图起就是以“主—客”（即“心—物”或“天—人”）二分立论。然而中国哲学在思维模式上与之有着根本的不同，也是在轴心时代就以“天人合一”（即“主客相即不离”）立论。

中国哲学的源头之一可以说是《周易》，在1993年于湖北荆门出土的“楚简”有一段非常重要的记载：

礼，交之行述也。

乐，或生或教者也。

书，□□□□者也。

诗，所以会古今之诗是也，

易，所以会天道、人道也。

春秋，所以会古今之事也。


Output:
诗，所以会古今之诗是也，

易，所以会天道、人道也。

春秋，所以会古今之事也。

这些竹简大概是在公元前300 年前写的东西。从这个记载看，“易，所以会天道、人道也，”是说《周易》是研究天道（天的规律）和人道（人类社会的秩序）会通道理的书。这就是说，在中国古代很早就注意到，研究“天”不能不牵涉到“人”，研究“人”也不能不牵涉到“天”，这就是“天人合一”思想。其实在《论语》中也已经透露出这一消息，子贡说：“夫子之言性与天道，不可得而闻也。”子贡虽然没有听到过孔子讲“性与天道”的言论，但他把这个问题提出来就说明当时人对“人性”（人）与“天道”（天）的关系问题十分关注。从人类社会的发展上看，人们最初遇到的问题就是“人”与“自然界”（天）的关系问题，因为人要生存就离不开“自然界”。所以在中国古代一直都在关注“天人关系”问题。

当然对如何处理和看待“天人关系”自古就有各种不同的看法：有的学者主张应顺应自然；有的学者认为应利用“天”来为人服务，“制天命而用之”；有的主张“天人交相胜”等等。但儒家思想的主流多主张“天人合一”。所谓“天人合一”是说“天”离不开“人”，“人”也离不开“天”。


Output: 为什么有这样的思想，可以说其起源很早。我们知道，《周易》本来是一部卜筮的书，它是人用来占卜、问吉凶祸福的。向谁问？是向“天”问，“人”向“天”问吉凶祸福，《易经》记述了这些，所以这就成为“天”“人”关系的书。后来，出现了对这部书的种种解释，这就是《易传》。特别是其中的《系辞》可以说是对《易经》的一种哲学解释。既然《易经》所要解决的是“天人”关系问题，那么“人”和“天”究竟是个什么关系？《系辞》就是要回答这个问题。它认为：《易经》这部书无所不包，既包含“天道”“地道”，也包含“人道”，虽然“天道”表现为阴和阳，“地道”表现为“刚”和“柔”，“人道”表现为“仁”和“义”，但是这三者的道理是统一的，都是乾坤的表现。宋儒张载说：“三才两之（三才指‘天’‘地’‘人’），莫不有乾坤之道也。易一物而合三才，天（地）人一也，阴阳其气，刚柔其形，仁义其性。” 6 《易》把天（地）和人统一起来看，所以天人是一个相互关联的统一体。为什么用“乾”“坤”来表述“天”“地”“人”的统一，这是由于《易传》有个看法，因为“乾”是指“天行健，君子以自强不息”的，“坤”是指“地势坤，君子以厚德载物”的。因此，“人”对“天地”（天）负有特殊的责任。“人”应以“自强不息”“厚德载物”的精神来担当天地所要求的大任。张载说，“天道”和“人道”从“道理”上说是统一的，如果要知道做人的道理不能不知道“天地”的道理，能知道“天地”的道理，也就可以知道“人”（社会）的道理。


Output: 所以宋儒对“天人合一”思想发挥得更加深刻了，例如程颐说：“安有知人道而不知天道者乎？道，一也。岂人道自是一道，天道自是一道？”照儒家看，不能把“天”“人”分成两截，更不能把“天”“人”看成是一种外在的对立关系，不能研究其中一个而不牵涉另外一个。朱熹说得更明白：“天即人，人即天。人之始生，得之于天也；既生此人，则天又在人矣。” 7 “天”离不开“人”，“人”也离不开“天”。人初产生时，虽然得之于天（由天产生的），但是一旦有了人，“天”的道理就要由“人”来彰显，即“人”对“天”就有了一个责任。如果没有“人”如何能体现“天”的活泼气象，如何体现“天”的“自强不息”，“地”的“厚德载物”呢？所以人应该知道“为天地立心”就是“为生民立命”，不能分割为二。所以《郭店竹简·语丛一》中说：“知天所为，知人所为，然后知道。知道然后知命。”知道了“天道”（自然运行的规律）和“人道”（人类社会生活的规律），这样才叫作知道“天”和“人”有一个统一的道理，然后才可以知道“天”（天道）和“人”（“人道”，社会）发展的趋向。孔子说：“知天命”。“知天命”就是说“人”应知道“天”的运行发展的趋势。孔子又说：“畏天命”，要对“天”有所敬畏，不能随便破坏“天”的发展规律。因为中国哲学一向不把“天”看成一死物，而把它视为是有机的，连续性发展的，有生意的（生生不息的），与人为一体的。“人”的存在离不开“天”，这是大家都能懂得的道理，但是为什么“人”有时把自己置于与“天”对立的地位，肆意地破坏“天”，把“天”作为征服的对象呢？这是由于他们把“天”和“人”看成只存在着一种外在的关系，而不了解“天”和“人”之间的关系是一种息息相关的内在关系。“内在关系”与“外在关系”不同，“外在关系”是说在“天”与“人”二者之间是各自独立的，各不相干的；而“内在关系”是说在“天”“人”二者之间存在着相即不离的关系。因此，“天人合一”虽是中国哲学中的一个很古老的哲学命题，它是中国儒家思想的基石，它同时也是一常新的人类社会需要不断给以新的诠释的命题。我们在考虑人类自身问题时，必须考虑与“天”（自然界）的关系问题，而且应是接着“天人合一”的观念来不断深入探讨“天”和“人”存在着的相即不离的内在关系。当前人类社会不正是由于长期严重地忽略了“天”与“人”的相即不离的内在关系正在受惩罚吗？不是“人类”和自然正走上一条相互抵触的道路吗？


Output:
由《周易》开出的“天人合一”思想（即“易，会天道，人道也”的思想）对解决当今“人与自然”的矛盾作为一种思维模式，或者可以给我们以下三点启发：

第一，“天人合一”作为一种思维模式，它要求人们不能把“人”看成是和“天”对立的，这是由于“人”是“天”的一部分，“人之始生，得之于天”。破坏“天”就是对“人”自身的破坏，“人”就要受到惩罚。因此，“人”不仅应“知天”（认识自然，以便合理地利用自然），而且应该“畏天”（对自然界应该敬畏，要把保护“天”作为一种神圣的责任）。现在人们只强调“知天”，只是一味用“知识”来利用“天”，征服“天”，以至无序地破坏“天”，而不知对“天”应有所敬畏，这无疑是“科学主义”（科技万能）极端发展的表现。“科学主义”否定了“天”的神圣性，从而也就否定了“天”的超越性，这样就使人们的人文精神失去了依托。中国人的“天人合一”学说认为，“知天”和“畏天”是统一的，“知天”而不“畏天”，就会把“天”看成一死物，不了解“天”乃是有机的，生生不息的刚健的大流行。“畏天”而不“知天”，就会把“天”看成是外在于“人”的神秘力量，而使人不能真正得到天的恩惠。“知天”和“畏天”的统一，正是“天人合一”的重要表现，从而表现着“人”对“天”的一种内在责任。“天人合一”这个哲学命题，体现着“天”与“人”的复杂关系，它不仅包含着“人”应该如何认识“天”，同样也包含着“人”应该尊敬“天”，因为“天”有其神圣性。这也许正是由于中国儒家没有成为一般意义上的宗教（如佛教和基督教等），但是它却具有一定的“宗教性”。也许正因为如此，在中国，儒家思想可以起着某种宗教的功能，这就是它认为“人”依“天”所具有的“内在”品德经过自我德行修养而实现其“超凡入圣”的“超越性”。因此，“天人合一”不仅是“人”对“天”的认知，而且是“人”应追求的人生境界。因为“天”不仅仅是自然意义上的天，而且也是神圣意义上的“天”，“人性”就其内在要求上说，以求达到“同于天”的超越境界。就这个意义上说，“人”和“天”不仅不是对立的，而且“人”应与“天地”为一体，如孟子所说：“君子所过者化，所存者神，上下与天地同流，”以实现其自身的超越。这样一种思维路径，不仅对我们走出“天人二分”（天人对立）的困境有十分重要的意义，而且也为人类走向理想人生境界开辟了道路。


Output: 第二，我们不能把“天”和“人”的关系看成是一种外在关系，这是因为“天即人，人即天”，“天”和“人”是相即不离的。“人”离不开“天”，离开“天”，则“人”无法生存；“天”离不开“人”，离开“人”，则“天”的道理无法彰显，谁来担当实现“天道”的责任呢？这种对存在于“天”和“人”之间的内在关系的认知正是中国哲学的特点。王夫之对此有一重要的说明。他说：我们考察自古以来学者的学说，从汉朝以来，他们对先秦儒家的学说只抓住其外在的现象，而认为《易经》只是讲“天道”的，而不知《易经》也是“人道”的根本，自从周敦颐首先提出“太极图”的学说，这个学说是研究“天人合一”的根源的，它阐明了人之始生是“天道”变化产生的结果，在“天道”的变化之中把它的精华部分给了“人”，使人具有了不同于其他事物的“人性”，这样就可以发现“人道”（人类社会的规则）的一切日用伦常之理，就是“天道”（宇宙规律）阴阳变化的秩序。“人道”和“天道”是统一的，这点是不能违背的。“人道”本于“天道”（因“人”是“天”的一部分），讨论“人道”不能离开“天道”，同样讨论“天道”也必须考虑“人道”，这是因为“人道”的“日用事物当然之理”，也是“天道”的阴阳变化的秩序。所以张载说：《周易》这部书“得天而未始遗人”。


Output:
第三，为什么说儒家哲学认为，在“天”和“人”之间存在着一种相即不离的“内在关系”？盖自古以来，至少由西周以来，在中国的思想中有“天听自我民听，天视自我民视”的思想传统，从孔孟到程朱陆王都是这样认识的。在这个问题上，朱熹有个说法也许反映出孔子“仁学”的一贯思想，他说：“仁者”，“在天则盎然生物之心，在人则温然爱人利物之心，包四德而贯四端者也。” 8 “天道”生生不息，以仁为心，“天”有使万物良好的生长发育的功能，故“人”要效法“天”，要对人慈爱，要使万物得益。这是因为“天人一体”，“人”得“天”之精髓而为“人”，故人生在世当以实现“天”的“盎然生物之心”，而有“温然爱人得物之心”，“天心”“人心”实为一心。“人”有其实现“天道”的责任，人生之意义就在于体证“天道”，人生之价值就在于成就“天命”，故“天”“人”关系实为一内在关系。就以上几点来讨论“天人合一”，我们对之作哲学的理解，这样才能洞见其真精神，真价值。它是作为一种世界观和思想方式，一种思考问题的路径来看“天人关系”的，它的意义在于赋予“人”一种不可推卸的责任。“人”必须在“同于天”的过程中（提高到“天”的境界），实现“人”的自身超越，达到理想的“天人合一”的境界。

当然，儒家的“天人合一”思想不大可能直接具体地解决当前人类社会存在的一个一个“人与自然矛盾”的问题。但是，“天人合一”作为一哲学命题，一种思维模式，认为不能把“天”“人”分成两截，而应把“天”“人”看成相即不离的一体，“天”和“人”存在着内在的相通关系，无疑会从哲学思想上为解决“天”“人”关系，提供一有积极意义的思路。

五


Output:
五

当今人类社会存在的“人与人之间的矛盾”较之于“人与自然的矛盾”更为复杂，它不仅涉及“自己与他人”“人与社会群体”“国家与国家”“民族与民族”“地域与地域”之间的种种矛盾，例如：对物欲和权力的追求，对自然资源的争夺、占有和野心的膨胀，造成国家与国家、民族与民族、地域与地域之间的对立和战争，而且有“帝国霸权”和“恐怖主义”等等。过分注重金钱的追求和物质的享受，特别是统治者的贪污腐化，欺压老百姓，造成人与人之间关系的紧张，社会的冷漠，帮派林立，黑社会的猖狂等等。在人类社会中，现在儿童有儿童的问题，青年有青年的问题，老年有老年的问题，人与人之间在日常生活中的互不理解和仇视，心灵上的隔膜，使社会的和谐全失，这样发展下去终将导致人类社会的瓦解。儒学是否能对现代社会存在的种种弊病提供某些有意义的思想资源呢？我认为，也许孔子儒家的“仁学”能对造就“人与人”，扩而大之国家与国家、民族与民族、地域与地域之间的和谐，即造就“和谐社会”有重要意义。


Output: 《郭店竹简·性自命出》中说：“道始于情，情生于性。始者近情，终者近义。”意思是说，人与人的关系开始时是建立在感情基础上，而感情是生于人的本性。因此，人与人的关系开始时更加根据情（如母子之情），到后来则更加根据道义。这里的“道”是指“人道”，即处理人与人之间关系的规律，或者说是处理社会关系的原则，它虽然和“天道”有联系，但也和“天道”不一样，“天道”指自然界的（或指相对于“人”的外界）运行规律。“道始于情”是说人与人的关系的建立是由感情开始的，这正是孔子“仁学”的出发点。孔子的弟子樊迟问“仁”，孔子回答说：“爱人。”这种“爱人”的品德从何而来呢？《中庸》引孔子的话说：“仁者，人也，亲亲为大。”“仁爱”的品德是人本身所具有的，爱自己的亲人是最基本的。但儒家认为“仁”的精神不能仅仅停留在爱自己的亲人上面，《郭店竹简》中说：“亲而笃之，爱也；爱父，其继之爱人，仁也。”对自己亲人爱到极点，那也只能叫“爱”；爱自己的父亲，扩大到爱别人，这才叫作“仁”。又说：“孝之放，爱天下之民。”对父母的孝顺要放大到爱护天下的老百姓。不过爱自己的亲人无论如何是爱别人的基础，“爱亲则方其爱人”。这就是说，孔子儒家的“仁学”要由“亲亲”扩大到“仁民”。也就是说，要“推己及人”，要做到“老吾老以及人之老”“幼吾幼以及人之幼”，才叫作“仁”。做到“推己及人”并不容易，必须把“己所不欲，勿施于人”，“己欲立而立人，己欲达而达人”的“忠恕之道”作为实现“仁”的准则。（朱熹《四书集注》：“尽己之谓忠；推己之谓恕。”）如果把“仁”推广到社会（全人类社会），这就是孔子说的：“克己复礼为仁。一日克己复礼，天下归仁焉。为仁由己，而由人乎哉？”古来曾把“克己”（克服私欲）和“复礼”（复兴礼制）解释为平行的两个方面，我认为这不是对“克己复礼”的好的解释。所谓有“克己复礼为仁”是说只有在“克己”基础上的“复礼”才叫作“仁”。费孝通先生对此有一解释，他说：“克己才能复礼，复礼是进入社会，成为一个社会人的必要条件。扬己和克己也许正是东西方文化的差别的一个关键。”我认为这话很有道理。一个人要进入社会，必须对自己有个要求，例如说自己应该要求做到“己所不欲，勿施于人”，这样你才可以遵守社会的规范（礼），而成为社会的人；一个国家也一样，你必须对自己有个遵守世界的“公约”和“公理”的要求，这样世界公约、公理才得以维护


Output: 。费先生认为，中国文化主张“克己”，对于人与人之间相处较好；而西方文化主张“扬己”，把自己抬高到别人、别国之上，这怎么能不发生冲突和战争呢？朱熹对“克己复礼为仁”的解释说：“克，胜也。己，谓身之私欲也。复，反也。礼者，天理之节文也。”这就是说，要克服自己的私欲，以使之做人行事能符合礼仪制度规范。“仁”是人所具有的内在品德（“爱生于性”）；就社会生活说，“礼”是规范人的行为的外在的礼仪制度，它的作用是为了调节人与人之间的关系使之和谐相处，“礼之用，和为贵”。要人遵守礼仪制度必须是出于其内在的“爱人”之心，才符合“仁”的要求，所以孔子说：“为仁由己，而由人乎哉？”对“仁”和“礼”的关系，孔子也有非常明确的说法：“人而不仁如礼何？人而不仁如乐何？”没有仁爱之心的礼乐那是虚伪的，是为了骗人的。所以孔子认为，人们如果有了追求“仁”的自觉要求，并把这种“仁爱之心”按照一定的规范实现于日常社会之中，这样社会就会和谐安宁了，“一日克己复礼，天下归仁焉”。这种把追求“仁”的信念实践于日常实际生活之中，就是《中庸》所说的“极高明而道中庸”。“极高明”要求追求人生上的最高原则，即“仁”的理想；“道中庸”要求人们按照规则把“仁爱”精神实现于日常生活之中（“中庸”，用中的意思）。“极高明”和“道中庸”不能分为两截，这就是儒家的最高理想“内圣外王之道”。我们今天要求建设“和谐社会”，孔子的这些话无疑对我们有重要的价值。《论语》中讲了许多“仁”的道理，但没有出现“仁政”这两字，但是他说“导之以德，齐之以礼”“泛爱众”“举贤才”“博施于民，而能济众”等等都是讲的“仁政”。“仁政”在《孟子》一书中讲得很多，意义也很广泛，其中有些虽已不适合今日人类社会的要求，但其中也许有两点很重要，对我们今天建设和谐社会和实现世界和平仍然有重要意义。一是孟子认为“行仁政”就要使民有恒产，他说：“民之为道也，有恒产者有恒心，无恒产者无恒心。”


Output: 9 孟子的意思是说：对民的道理是，要使每个人都有一定的稳固产业，他才能有一定的道德观念和行为准则。没有一定稳固产业的人，便不会有一定的道德观念和行为准则。所以孟子说：“夫仁政，必自经界始。”意思是说：“仁政”首先要使老百姓有自己的土地。我想，我们要真正建立“和谐社会”就必须“使民有恒产”。就全人类社会说，就要使各国、各民族都能自主拥有其应有的财富才行，强国不能掠夺别国的财富和资源以及推行强权政治。二是孟子的“仁政”要求反对非正义战争，他认为“得道多助，失道寡助”，这里的“道”是“道义”的意思，在《公孙丑下》中有一段记载，他认为：天时不如地利，地利不如人和。他说：


Output:
域民不以封疆之界，固国不以山谷之险，威天下不以兵革之利，得道者多助，失道者寡助。寡助之至，亲戚畔之，多助之至，天下顺之。以天下之所顺，攻亲戚之所畔，故君子有不战，战必胜矣。 10

这段话的意思是说：限制老百姓不必用国家的疆界，保护国家不一定靠山川的险固，威行天下不必凭兵器的锐利，得道多助，失道寡助。少助到了极点，连亲戚都反对他；多助到了极点，全天下都归顺他。拿天下都归顺的力量来攻打连亲戚都反对的人，那么合乎道义的君子或者不必用战争，若用战争，最后必然是会胜利的。所以儒家往往把战争分为“正义战争”和“非正义战争”，孟子说：“春秋无义战”，“失民心者，失天下”。这个道理对一个国家内的统治者说也一样。汉初的贾谊写过一篇《过秦论》，他总结秦亡之因在于“仁义不施，攻守之势异”。并引用了一句谚语：“前事不忘，后事之师。”这不也是我们今天应该借鉴的吗？孔子儒家这些思想，对一个国家的“治国”者，对于世界上的那些发达国家的统治集团不能说没有意义。“治国、平天下”应该行“仁政”，行“王道”，不应该行“霸道”，不能压迫老百姓。

自1993年亨廷顿提出“文明的冲突论”之后，引起了各国学术界的广泛讨论。在人类历史上看，由于文化（哲学、宗教、价值观念）的不同引起的冲突和战争并不少见，就是进入21世纪虽未发生世界性的大战，但局部地区的战争则不断，其中无疑政治、经济是冲突和战争非常重要的一个原因，但文化确也在相当大的程度上是国家与国家、民族与民族、地域与地域之间冲突和战争的原因，如何化解这种因文化上的原因引起的冲突甚至战争，也许孔子提出的“和而不同”是一条非常有意义的原则。


Output: 在中国历史上，一向认为“和”与“同”是不同的两个概念，有所谓有“和同之辨”。《左传·昭公二十年》记载：“公曰：唯据与我和夫？晏子对曰：据亦同也，焉得为和？公曰：和与同异乎？对曰：异。和如羹焉，水火醯醢盐梅以烹鱼肉，燀之以薪。宰夫和之，齐之以味，济其不及，以泄其过。君子食之，以平其心。君臣亦然。……今据不然。君所谓可，据亦曰可。君所谓否，据亦曰否。若以水济水，谁能食之？若琴瑟之专一，谁能听之？同之不可也如是。” 11 《国语·郑语》：“夫和实生物，同则不继。以他平他谓之和，故能丰长而物归之；若以同裨同，尽乃弃矣。故先王以土与金、木、水、火杂，以成百物。”可见“和”与“同”是两个不同的概念。“以他平他”，是以相异和相关为前提，相异的事物相互协调并进，就能发展；“以同裨同”，则是以相同的事物叠加，其结果只能窒息生机。中国传统文化的最高理想是“万物并育而不相害，道并行而不相悖”。（“万物并育”和“道并行”是“不同”；“不相害”“不相悖”则是“和”。）这种思想为多元文化共处提供了取之不尽的思想源泉。


Output:
不同的民族和国家应该可以通过文化的交往与对话，在对话（商谈）和讨论中取得某种“共识”，这是一由“不同”到某种意义上的相互“认同”的过程。这种相互“认同”不是一方消灭一方，也不是一方“同化”一方，而是在两种不同文化中寻找交汇点，并在此基础上推动双方文化的发展，这正是“和”的作用。因此，我们必须努力追求在不同文化之间通过对话，实现和谐相处。现在中西许多学者都认识到，通过对话沟通不同文化之间的相互理解的重要性。例如哈贝马斯提出“正义”和“团结”的观念。我认为，把它们作为处理不同民族文化之间关系的原则，应该是很有意义的。哈贝马斯的“正义原则”可理解为，要保障每一种民族文化的独立自主、按照其民族的意愿发展的权利；“团结原则”可理解为，要求对其他民族文化有同情理解和加以尊重的义务。只有不断通过对话和交往等途径，才可以在不同民族文化之间形成互动中的良性循环。2002年去世的德国哲学家伽达默尔提出，应把“理解”扩展到“广义对话”层面。正因为“理解”被提升到“广义对话”，主体与对象（主观与客观或主与宾）才得以从不平等地位过渡到平等地位；反过来说，只有对话双方处于平等地位，对话才可能真正进行并顺利完成。可以说，伽达默尔所持的主体—对象平等意识和文化对话论，正是我们这个时代所需要的重要理念。这种理念，对我们今天如何正确而深入地理解中外文化关系、民族关系等等，具有重要的启示！ 12 。无论哈贝马斯的“正义”和“团结”原则，或者是伽达默尔的“广义对话论”，都要以承认“和而不同”原则为前提。只有承认不同文化传统的民族和国家可以和谐相处，不同的文化传统的民族与国家才能获得平等的权利和义务，“广义对话”才能“真正进行并顺利完成”。因此孔子以“和为贵”为基础的“和而不同”原则应成为处理不同文化之间的一条基本原则。

六


Output:
六

如果我们以儒家的“合天人”（天人合一）的观念来为解决“人和自然”之间的矛盾提供某些思想资源，以“同人我”（人我合一）的观念来解决“人与人”之间的矛盾，那么我们可以用“一内外”（身心合一）来调节自我身心内外的矛盾。现代社会，由于种种内外的压力，特别是人们无止境地追求感官之享受，致使身心失调，人格分裂。由于心理的不平衡引起精神失常、酗酒、杀人、自杀等等，造成了自我身心的扭曲，已经成为一种社会病，而严重影响了社会的安宁，其原因正在于道德沦丧，致使人失去了自我身心内外的和谐。对这样一种情况，许多有见识的学者都为此提出救治的理论和策略。从中国传统文化看，可以说儒家对人的身心道德修养和人格培育给以特别的重视。


Output: 在《郭店竹简·性自命出》中说：“闻道反己，修身者也。”意思是说，知道了“道”，就应该反求诸己，这就是“修身”。《大学》这部书更加特别强调人的道德实践对于建设理想的和谐社会的重要意义。它的第一章中说：“大学之道，在明明德，在新民，在止于至善。”朱熹注说：“新者，革其旧之谓也。言既自明其明德，又当推己及人，使之亦有以去其旧染之污也。……言明明德、新民，皆当止于至善之地而不迁。”（明德：真实无妄的道理），明明德、新民的目的在止于至善，达到做人的最高境界。所以《大学》中认为，修身、齐家、治国、平天下，“自天子以至于庶人，壹是皆以修身为本，其本乱而末治者否矣”。这就是说，儒家认为每个人（自天子以至庶人）的道德修养好了，那么“家”可以齐，“国”可以治，“天下”可以太平，如果自己的道德修养这个根本混乱了，“家”“国”“天下”能够治好，那根本是不可能的。所以在《中庸》一书中也说：“为政在人，取人以身，修身以道，修道以仁。”治理社会是要靠人来治理，让什么人来治理就要看他自身的道德修养，道德修养是以合不合“道”为标准，这里的“道”是指“天下之达道”，即“和谐”（和），而做到使社会和谐就要有“仁爱”之心。这里，把个人的道德修养（修身）与“仁”联系起来，正说明儒家思想的一贯性。儒家讲“修身”不是没有目标的，而是为了“齐家”“治国”“平天下”，即为了建设“和谐社会”。《礼记·礼运》中所记载的“大同”社会的理想，就是要求建立一在政治、经济、文化上诸多方面的和谐社会。儒家把和谐社会的理想建立在人的道德修养的提高的基础上，因此，儒家特别重视人的自我身心内外的修养。儒家认为，生死和富贵等等不是人应追求的最终目标，而道德学问才是人所应追求的。孔子说：“德之不修，学之不讲，闻义而不能徙，不善不能改，是吾忧也。”孔子这段话告诉我们的是做人的道理：“修德”（修养道德）并不容易，必须有崇高的理想，有关怀人类社会福祉的胸襟。“讲学”（讲究学问）也不容易，它不但要求自己提高智慧，而且要负起对社会进行人文教化的责任。“改过”，人总是会犯这样那样的错误，但要能勇于改正错误，这样才可以有助于社会的和谐。“向善”，是说人生在世，应日日向着善的方向努力，做到“日日新，又日新”，这样就可以达到“止于至善”的境地。“修德”“讲学”“改过”“向善”是孔子儒家提倡的做人的道理，是使人自我身心内外和谐的有意义的路径。所以孟子说：“存其心，养其性，所以事天也


Output: 。所以孟子说：“存其心，养其性，所以事天也。夭寿不贰，修身以俟之，所以立命也。”如果一个人能保存他的恻隐之心，修养他的善性，以实现天道的要求，寿命的长短都无所谓了，但一定要通过对自身的修养保持和天道的一致，这就是安身立命了。


Output:
儒家的“修身”是有目的的，《周易·系辞下》中说：“利用安身，以崇德为。”人们为人行事要益于社会而安身，以达到对道德的推崇。个人通过道德修养，以使其精神境界得以升华，来实现“为天地立心，为生民立命，为往圣继绝学，为万世开太平”的大事业，实践“立大本行达道”的大事业。这对个人自身说，其人生境界自有一内外和谐的“安身立命”处，也就是宋儒所追求的“孔颜乐处”了。朱熹在其《答张敬夫书》中与敬夫讨论“中和义”时说：“而今而后，乃知浩浩大化之中，自家自有个安宅，正是自家安身立命、主宰知觉处，所以立大本行达道之枢要，所谓体用一源，显微无间，乃在于此。” 13 儒家认为，找一“安身立命”处，对自己的身心内外之和谐至关重要，所以朱熹说：“但能致中和于一身，则天下虽乱，而吾身之天地万物，不害而为安泰；其不能者，天下虽治，而吾身之天地万物，不害而为乖错。其间一国一家，莫不然。”如果自我的身心内外能够做到中正和谐，即使天下大乱，在自己和天地万物之间，对自己的身心安宁康泰就不会有什么影响；如果自我的身心内外做不到中正和谐，即使天下治理得很好，自己的身心也将是不安和错乱的。无论治世、乱世，自己都应修德敬业，这样就可以在活着的时候尽伦尽职，在离开人世的时候将是很安宁的，所以张载《西铭》的最后两句话说：“存，吾顺事；没，吾宁也。”

儒家一向都非常看重“安身立命”。所谓“安身立命”就是要对自己有个道德修养上的要求，这样才能使自己身心和谐，内外调适，使自己的言行符合“做人的道理”，这样身才能安，命才能立。至于那些有碍自我身心内外和谐的外在影响，应该排除。曾子说：“吾日三省吾身。为人谋，而不忠乎；与朋友交，而不信乎；传，不习乎。”做个君子人，每天都应时时警惕自己，看看自己为人行事，是否合乎道义。对于那些不合乎道义的事，甚至应该做到“杀身成仁，舍生取义”，所以孔子说：“志士仁人，无求生以害仁，有杀身以成仁。”孟子说：“吾身不能居仁由义，谓之自弃也。”要做到儒家提倡的“做人的道理”，很不容易，但应该是人们努力去追求的，这样自己才可以有个“安身立命”处，其身心内外自然和谐了。而追求自我身心内外的和谐其目的是为了实现社会的和谐。


Output:
司马迁说过：“居今之世，志古之道，所以自镜也，未必尽同”，我们今天温习阐发孔子儒家的思想，发掘其中对当今人类社会有意义的资源，无疑是重要的。但古来圣贤的思想、理念并不能全然解决当今社会存在的所有问题，也并不能全都适应现代社会的要求，它只能给我们一些思考的路子，启发我们去用这些思想资源，在给以适应现代社会生活要求的新的诠释的基础上，才有可能为建设和谐的人类社会做出贡献。“周虽旧邦，其命维新。” 14 我们中华民族是一个有着长达五千年的历史文化的古老民族，我们的使命是使我们的社会不断革新，从而对全人类作出贡献。

IV．IMMANENCE AND TRANSCENDENCE IN CHINESE CHAN BUDDHISM

From its transmission into China till Sui (581-618) and Tang (618-907) dynasties, Buddhism had developed into several schools: Tian-tai, Consciousness-only, Vinaya, Pure Land, Hua yan, Chan 1 , etc. Since Tang Dynasty, Chan Buddhism has become increasingly influential and even has been particularly thriving to surpass all the other schools that declined early or late. No doubt there are many reasons for its thriving, perhaps one of the reasons is that Chan Buddhism can particularly reflect the characteristic of Chinese philosophy—"immanent transcendence," to which scholars probably should pay more attention.


Output:
As a religion, Buddhism has its doctrinal scriptures, its regular rituals, its precepts, its worshiped objects and so on, but Chan Buddhism after Hui Neng (638-713) renounced all things above. So in Chan Buddhism there is no need to chant scriptures, observe precepts, follow any rituals and worship any images, and even leaving home and becoming a monk or nun becomes dispensable, hence to become a Buddha and attain the state of nirvana can only rely on the awareness of one's own mind. It says: "One who can be aware within one thought is a Buddha, but confused within one thought a sentient being." That is to say, to become a Buddha and attain the transcendental state completely depends on the role of the immanent essential mind.

I．Chinese Chan Buddhism neither valued scriptures nor established words, but claimed everything should listen to the essential mind


Output:
There is a Chan story called "Buddha twirls a flower and Maha-Kashapa smiles," which is recorded in Zhi Yue Lu (Record of Fingers Pointing to the Moon ):

When Buddha was in Grdhrakuta mountain he turned a flower in his fingers and held it before his listeners. Every one was silent. Only Maha-Kashapa smiled at this revelation, although he tried to control the lines of his face. Buddha said: "I have the eye of the true teaching, the heart of Nirvana, the true aspect of non-form, and the ineffable stride of Dharma. It is not expressed by words, but especially transmitted beyond teaching. This teaching I have given to Maha-Kashapa."


Output: Chan Buddhism considered itself as "transmitted beyond teaching," and proclaimed itself as distinguished from the other schools by telling such stories. At the beginning of Buddhism in India, it was quite simple and originally a philosophy of life, in which Shakyamuni Buddha avoided discussing those theories unrelated with real life, say, concerned little about the following problems—"whether the universe is permanent or impermanent," "whether the universe is limited or unlimited," "whether life exists or not after death," "whether life and body are one or not," etc—which were often heatedly discussed at his time in India. Later Indian Buddhism became more and more complicated during its developing, further and further away from real life, and its system became larger and larger, its worshiped images more and more, its technical terms innumerable, which were completely incompatible with Chinese traditional thoughts. After Sui and Tang dynasties, many Chinese Buddhist schools were trying every possible way to


Output: schools were trying every possible way to get over this complication of Indian Buddhism, such as, "one billion worlds entered into one thought" in Tian Tai School and "principle and matter integrated into one real mind" in Hua Yan School both emphasized the role of the essential mind. This tendency was further intensified in Chan Buddhism after Hui Neng, hence its insistence on establishment in no words and renunciation of all scriptures.


Output: Hui Neng himself did not renounce the scriptures and advocate establishment in no words yet. It is recorded in Platform Sutra that Hui Neng taught his disciples about Diamond Sutra and Lotus Sutra , but he maintained that "all scriptures and books exist and tell something in accordance with people" (Platform Sutra ) and are only the tools to conduct people; hence one should not cling to the scriptures because one cannot become a Buddha by chanting the scriptures, and one can be liberated only by relying on one's essential mind. The reasons are: on the one hand, the principles and methods of becoming a Buddha originally exist in one's own essential mind, so "the twelve-part canons of the Buddhas of past, present, and future are originally inherent in one's nature" (Platform Sutra ). Thus there is no need seeking outside, no need to search the Buddha out of mind, because to be a Buddha and become enlightened totally depends upon oneself, and the extrinsic words just have nothing to do with it. On the other


Output: just have nothing to do with it. On the other hand, words are outside things. If one attaches to these outside things, one "attaches to the forms." "One's own essential nature inherently has the insight of Prajñā (wisdom), and if one is continually observant, use one's own insight; therefore one does not depend on words" (Platform Sutra ). In order to break the bondage of the scriptures, Chan masters after Hui Neng were simply against chanting the scriptures, and even against all kinds of words. It is recorded in Wu Deng Hui Yuan (The Five Lamps Meet at the Origin ): Wei Shan (771-853) asked Yang Shan (814-890), " Nirvana Sutra has forty volumes. How many are said by Buddha? How many by mara (devil)?" (Vol. 9). Yang Shan answered: "All are said by mara (devil)." If one attaches the sutras as Dharma itself, one has already been bewitched and hoodwinked by devils. Gu Zun Su Yu Lu (Recorded Sayings of the Ancient Worthies ) records: "As to those things which are considered as Buddhas, interpreted as Buddhas, if


Output: considered as Buddhas, interpreted as Buddhas, if one sees something, finds something and attaches something, all of these are called dung of intellectual play, coarse words and dead language" (Vol. 2). Jing De Chuan Deng Lu (Record of the Transmission of the Lamp ) records: Lin Ji (787?-867) "went to Huang Bo mountain (where his master lived) in a mid-summer, and saw his master Huang Bo (?-850) reading a sutra. He said, 'I thought there is a man but actually an old monk who puts black soy beans into his mouth'" (Vol. 12). All scriptures are nonsense. By attaching to these nonsense, how can one be liberated and become a Buddha? Since Buddhist scriptures are "dead language" and "said by mara (devil)," not the tools to awaken, naturally they are not to be fallen back on to attain the goal of becoming a Buddha. Gu Zun Su Yu Lu records Nan Quan (748-834) saying: "The Way does not belong to the category of knowing or not knowing, because knowing is false awareness and not knowing is no memory. If one really


Output: and not knowing is no memory. If one really attains the Way of no-doubt which is like great emptiness, wide, vast and open, how can one tell right or wrong?" (Vol. 13). The Way does not belong to the category of knowledge, which have the difference between subject and object, but the enlightenment to the Way relies on the self-awareness of the mind. If so, the self can't be not self-aware; if the self isn't self-aware, it is "avidya (ignorance)." Therefore "not knowing is no memory."


Output: Chan masters thought that words were unnecessary and language cannot be beneficial to the enlightenment and becoming a Buddha. Only through language one cannot comprehend the Buddhist Dharma. Someone asked Wen Yi (885-958): "What is the first meaning (of Buddhist Dharma)?" Wen Yi replied: "If I tell you, it is already the second meaning" (Wen Yi Chan Shi Yu Lu [ Recorded Sayings of Chan Master Wen Yi ]). The Dharma is ineffable, and what has been said is already not the Dharma itself. Therefore, is there any method that may lead people to the enlightenment? As far as Chan Buddhism sees, hardly is there any other method for becoming enlightened but through one's own awareness. However, Chan Buddhism also used very special methods, such as "stick and shout" to instruct disciples. It is recorded in Wu Deng Hui Yuan :


Output:
A monk asked: "What is bodhi (awakening)?" Master (De Shan, 782-865) struck him and said: "Get out! Don't shit here!" One asked: "What is Buddha?" Master said: "Buddha is an old bhiksu (monk) in India." Xue Feng (822-908) asked: "By inheriting from patriarchs before, do you still have discriminations?" Master struck him with a stick and asked: "What does this mean?" Xue Feng answered: "I can't understand." On the next day, Xue Feng asked for more teaching. Master said: "There are neither languages nor sentences taught in our school, and I have no Dharma to give." Hence Xue Feng became aware. (Vol. 7)

It is also recorded in Jing De Chuan Deng Lu :

(Lin Ji came to) see Jing Shan. When Jing Shan just raised his head to see who was coming, Master (Lin Ji) shouted. When he just intended to open his mouth to say, Master left with a flick of his sleeve. (Vol. 12)


Output: This is so-called "De Shan's stick and Lin Ji's shout." These special methods are intended to break down people's attachment, and bring them back to the essential mind. As far as Chan Buddhism sees, one loses one's essential nature because one always attaches to something, therefore a sudden shout and an unexpected strike on the head would make one suddenly become enlightened and attain the Buddhahood by oneself. As Yuan Wu (1063-1135) said in Yuan Wu Fo Guo Chan Shi Yu Lu (Recorded Sayings of Chan Master Yuan Wu Fo Guo ): "De Shan's stick and Lin Ji's shout are both thorough and complete, and directly cut off the root of the old attachment. They are great knacks and uses, reaching the same end by innumerable means, and could remove bondages from the disciples" (Vol. 14). Lin Ji's master, Huang Bo, said in his Chuan Fa Xin Yao (Essential Teachings on the Transmission of Mind ):


Output:
This spiritually enlightening nature. . . cannot be looked for or sought, comprehended by wisdom or knowledge, explained in words, contacted materially or reached by meritorious achievement. All the Buddhas and Bodhisattvas, together with all wriggling things possessed of life, share in this great Nirvanic nature. This nature is Mind, Mind is the Buddha, and the Buddha is the Dharma.

Since this spiritually enlightening nature everyone has cannot be revealed by knowledge and language, the only way is to use stick and shout to break down the attachment (of course not necessarily to use stick and shout; any other method could make it if only they could break down the attachment), hence the mind has nothing to observe and one attains the transcendental state denying object and mind.

II．Chinese Chan Buddhism broke outmoded conventions and abolished sitting in meditation, 5 but only valued seeing the nature and accomplishing the Buddhahood


Output: Sitting in meditation is a practicing method used in every Buddhist schools. Shakyamuni Buddha became enlightened under the bodhi (awakening) tree by sitting in meditation for forty-nine days; Bodhidharma came to China and faced the wall by sitting in meditation for three years. After Hui Neng, there has been a great change in Chinese Chan Buddhism. In Platform Sutra , Hui Neng said: "It is only a matter of seeing the nature, not a matter of meditation or liberation." It is clear that Hui Neng insisted on "seeing the nature and accomplishing the Buddhahood," and believed only through meditation one cannot be liberated. Hence he said:


Output: Deluded people stick to the appearances of things: they cling to the idea of absorption in one practice as only meaning constantly sitting unmoving, not letting the mind be aroused at random. They identify this with absorption in one practice, but those who make this interpretation are equivalent to inanimate objects. This is a condition that obstructs the Way. The Way should be fluid, free-flowing. Why then do you stagnate? When the mind does not dwell on things, then the Way is fluid. If the mind dwells on things, that is called self-binding. If you say constant sitting is right, that is contradicted by the fact that Shariputra was scolded by Vimalakirti for sitting quietly in the forest (Platform Sutra ).


Output: Those who attach to sitting in meditation and believe deluded thought cannot arise through their sitting actually regard a human being as a dead thing, and know nothing about "the Way should be fluid." The mind should move and not dwell on things, otherwise the mind is bound, and then how could one be liberated? Gu Zun Su Yu Lu records: Ma Zu(709-788) "lived in Nan Yue Chuan Fa Monastery (where his master Huai Rang [677-744] presided) and stayed in a hut alone by practicing sitting in meditation without paying attention to the visitors (even to his master Huai Rang). . . . One day, (in order to instruct Ma Zu) Huai Rang put a tile in front of the hut and began to grind it. Ma Zu didn't pay attention to it at the beginning, but after a long time, Ma Zu got very curious and then asked: 'For what by grinding?' Huai Rang said: 'Grinding into a mirror.' Ma Zu laughed: 'How can a tile become a mirror by grinding?' Huai Rang retorted: 'If a tile cannot become a mirror by grinding, how could one become a Buddha by


Output: by grinding, how could one become a Buddha by sitting in meditation?'" (Vol. 1). Ma Zu sat in meditation and was bound by it, hence Huai Rang used "grinding a tile into a mirror," a metaphoric method, to inspire him to be enlightened. This is an example freeing from one's bondage by relying on others. Another example is Hui Leng (854-932) who had worn seven cattail hassocks by sitting in meditation for more than twenty years but still did not see the nature. Until one day when rolling up a curtain by a chance, he suddenly got enlightened, and composed a verse: "It was really a mistake, really a mistake, until I see the world when rolling up a curtain. If one asks me what kind of teaching I know, I shall pick up a whiskbroom and strike right toward his head" (Wu Deng Hui Yuan , Vol. 7). Hui Leng rolled up a curtain accidentally and saw that one billion worlds are just as they are, and then "witnessed the mind and saw the nature." He released the bondage of sitting in meditation, suddenly saw the whole thing


Output: in meditation, suddenly saw the whole thing in a clear light and became enlightened. It is said in Platform Sutra : "Those who cannot realize it themselves because of the wandering of the conditioned mind need a good knowing advisor to point it out and guide them to perception of essential nature; those who can realize it themselves don't have to turn outward for enlightenment." Ma Zu was inspired by Huai Rang, but Hui Leng became enlightened by himself. In any case, both Ma Zu and Hui Leng have to "realize the good knowing advisor within the essential mind." That is to say, one has to rely on one's immanent essential mind to attain the transcendental state. The saying "until I see the world when rolling up a curtain" in Hui Leng's verse is the crux of his enlightenment, because as far as Chan Buddhism sees, there is no need to deliberately make a certain thing to be enlightened and become a Buddha. One should naturally see the Way in ordinary daily life, just like "clouds floating in the blue sky and water


Output: like "clouds floating in the blue sky and water filling in the bottle," and everything goes naturally and ordinarily. There is a verse in Wu Men Guan (Gateless Gate ) written by Wu Men (1183-1260):


Output: In spring, hundreds of flowers; in autumn, a harvest moon; in summer, a refreshing breeze; in winter, snow will accompany you. If useless things do not hang in your mind, any season is a good season for you.


Output: This spiritual state of Chan Buddhism is a state going with the nature: one views the blooming of hundreds of flowers in spring, enjoys serenity under a harvest moon in autumn, feels the sudden coming of a refreshing breeze in summer, and watches thickly falling snowflakes swirling in winter. Let everything goes by itself at ease and without any obstruction, then "every daytime is a good day," and "every nighttime is an enjoyable night." If one attaches to sitting in meditation, one is bound by the method itself and cannot be liberated. Lin Ji said: "There is no place in Buddhism for deliberate effort. Just be ordinary and nothing special. Relieve your bowels, pass water, put on your clothes, and eat your food. When you are tired, go and lie down. Ignorant people may laugh at me, but the wise will understand" (Gu Zun Su Yu Lu , Vol. 11). If one wants to become a Buddha and attain the state of nirvana, one should not rely on the extrinsic practice, but be enlightened suddenly as Hui Leng experienced. A monk


Output: suddenly as Hui Leng experienced. A monk asked Ma Zu: "How to cultivate the Way?" Ma Zu said: "The Way cannot be cultivated. If one says it can be cultivated, even if it has been cultivated, it will disappear eventually" (Gu Zun Su Yu Lu , Vol. 1). How can the Way be cultivated? By relying on so-called "cultivation," one has to manage it with a contrived effort; certainly "it will disappear eventually." Therefore cultivating the Way cannot be searched deliberately out of ordinary life. A Vinaya Master You Yuan asked Hui Hai: "Do you make efforts in your practice of the Way?" Hui Hai answered: "Yes, I do." The Vinaya Master asked: "How?" Hui Hai answered: "When hungry, I eat; when tired, I sleep." The Vinaya Master asked: "And does not everybody do the same things, master?" Hui Hai answered: "Not in the same way." The Vinaya Master asked: "Why not?" Hui Hai answered: "When they are eating, they think of a hundred kinds of necessities, and when they are going to sleep they ponder over affairs of a thousand


Output: to sleep they ponder over affairs of a thousand different kinds. That is how they differ from me." An ordinary person eats with preference of the fat or the lean in the food, sleeps with going off into wild flights of fancy, and has different preferences and attachments and there is no chance for liberation. Those who truly know Chan should "sleep if need to sleep and sit if need to sit," "enjoy the cool if hot and warm at a fire if cold." A monk told Zhao Zhou (778-897): "I have just entered the monastery. Please teach me." Zhao Zhou asked: "Have you eaten your rice porridge?" The monk replied: "I have." Zhao Zhou said: "Then you had better wash your bowl." At that moment the monk was enlightened (Zhi Yue Lu , Vol. 11). After eating, naturally it is time to wash the bowl. This is so ordinary. Only through this can one meditate when sitting, meditate when sleeping, meditate when resting, and meditate when moving, therefore eating and shitting are both fine Way. If meditation is not necessary, there is no


Output: Way. If meditation is not necessary, there is no necessity to keep all kinds of precepts. Lu Xisheng asked Yang Shan: "Do you still observe precepts, master?" Yang Shan said: "I don't" (Wu Deng Hui Yuan , Vol. 9). Li Ao (772-841) asked Yao Shan (751-834): "What are sila (precepts), dhyana (meditation) and Prajñā (wisdom)?" Yao Shan said: "We don't have these idle fitments here!" (Jing De Chuan Deng Lu , Vol. 14) Sila (precepts), dhyana (meditation), and Prajñā (wisdom) are the "three practices" of Buddhism, an indispensable gateway for Buddhists, but Chan masters see them as something useless. It seems that this negation means that every practicing method is unnecessary; hence Chan Buddhism negates anything extrinsic and formal. The reason why Chan Buddhism sees like this is based on "the mind of everyday life is the mind of the Way." There is no "mind of the Way" apart from the mind of everyday life, and also no need to live any special life apart from everyday life. With this realization, the immanent mind


Output: life. With this realization, the immanent mind of everyday life can be the transcendental mind of the Way. It is just as Yin Shun (1906-2005) put in his The History of Chinese Chan Buddhism : "The nature is both transcendental (away from all forms and its body pure and clear) and immanent (all Dharma cannot be different from the nature). Only when one gets enlightened from everything here and now, at the same time not different from everything, and completely realizes that everything is just no other than the magical application of the nature, can one go into the world or renounce the world at one's will, get the substance and its application, integrate the matter with its principles, and have one's feet firmly planted on the ground." 16


Output: III．Chinese Chan Buddhism did not worship images, rather abused the Buddhas and berated the masters, and claimed "one who is enlightened in one thought is a Buddha"


Output: Indian Buddhism cannot keep from the influence of Indian culture which is strongly marked the character of mysticism, especially after Shakyamuni Buddha. For example, there are so-called "twenty-eight heavens" and "eighteen hells," attached to which are adjacent heavens or hells, and there are also innumerous Buddhas and Bodhisattvas who have supernatural powers. Certainly all these are influenced by Indian traditional culture. Even the much simpler Indian Chan which is considered as "transmitted beyond teaching" is still of mystical character. It is said that all twenty-eight masters of Indian Chan have so-called "Six Supernatural Powers": (1) the power of divine audition; (2) the power of divine vision; (3) the power of awareness of the minds of others;(4) the power of the knowledge of previous lifetimes; (5) unimpeded bodily action; (6) the power of the extinction of contamination. Even four meditative states—"The Four Meditation Heavens"—Indian Chan practiced are also very mystical. Chinese Chan Buddhism


Output: are also very mystical. Chinese Chan Buddhism after Hui Neng is very different. Hui Neng said: "My mind inherently has a Buddha in it; and the inner Buddha is the real Buddha" (Platform Sutra ). Based on this, Chan Buddhism was against supernatural powers and worshiping images. Wu Deng Hui Yuan records: Dao Ying (?-902) "built a house near a place called San Feng, and did not go to hall for ten days. Dong Shan (807-869) asked him: 'Why didn't you go to have meals recently?' Dao Ying said: 'A heavenly god served the food everyday.' Dong Shan told him: 'I thought you are a man, but still have this kind of idea. Come to my place at night.' Dao Ying came to Dong Shan's place at night. Dong Shan called his name: 'Dao Ying!' Dao Ying replied. Dong Shan said: 'If you neither think of good nor think of bad, then what leaves?' Dao Ying came back and sat silently. Since then Dao Ying couldn't find the heavenly god any more. After three days, there was completely no such a thing in Dao Ying's idea" (Vol. 13). The point