A New Perspective in the History of
East Asian Confucianism: Some Reflections on
Confucian Hermeneutics†
Junjie (Chun-chieh) Huang
I. Introduction
In East Asian studies, the history of East Asian Confucianism from a
comparative perspective is a topic with great potential for further development. As early as March of 1966, in a pre-retirement speech, ABE Yoshio 阿
部吉雄 (b. 1905) of Tokyo University once called for Japanese scholars to
struggle free from the bonds of Japanese centricism and to study the development of Chinese, Japanese, and Korean Confucianism from a comparative perspective (Abe 1973; 1979). Professor YU Yingshi 余英時 (b. 1930)
also called for scholars to pay attention to the development of Confucianism
in such neighboring nations as Japan, Korea, and Vietnam from the standpoint of comparative intellectual history (Yu 1976; see also Yu 1974). Within
this new field of comparative intellectual history, however, most writings
have at present focused their attention upon Confucianism and its relation to
modernization in East Asia. Although some studies have been done to explore issues internal to East Asian Confucianism, comparative research of a
†Translated
by Scott Cook, Professor of Chinese, Grinnell College.
Fellow, Institute of Chinese Literature and Philosophy, Academia Sinica; Professor of History, National Taiwan University, 1 Section 4, Roosevelt Road, Taipei, Taiwan 107. E-mail:
[email protected].

Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy June 2003, Vol. II, No. 2, pp. 235-260.
© 2003 by Global Scholarly Publications.
236
Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy
________________________________________________________________
more comprehensive nature still awaits us.
There are many avenues for comparative study of the history of East
Asian Confucianism; they cannot all be lumped into a single corner. For
example, we can carry out such comparative study by focusing on certain
central concepts within the Confucian tradition, such as xin 心 (heart/mind),
gong 公 (public) and si 私 (private) (see Mizoguchi 1995 & Tahara 1995), yi 義
(righteousness) and li 利 (profit), and wang 王(king) and ba 霸 (hegemon). We
can also engage in the comparison of such East Asian Confuc
i
a
nsa
sI
TŌ
Jinsai 伊藤仁齋 (Itei 維楨, 1627-1705) and DAI Zhen 戴震 (Dongyuan 東原,
1724-1777). More worthy of in-depth study, however, are interpretations of
the classics by East Asian Confucians since the tenth century and the implications such interpretations reveal. Renewed interpretations of the Confucian classics and their ideas by Confucians from such areas as China, Japan,
Korea, Taiwan, and Vietnam over the past thousand years constitute an
important phenomenon in the history of East Asian Confucianism. For
example, I
TŌ J
i
ns
a
io
nc
eof
f
e
r
e
dnov
e
le
x
pl
a
na
t
i
on
sofdao 道 and other
concepts in such classics as the Lunyu《論語》(Analects of Confucius) and the
Mencius 《孟子》; ISHIDA Umeiwa 石田梅岩 (1685-1744) once interpreted the
Confucian concept of li 理 (order; principle) as containing not only ethical
qualities, but the laws of the market as well. Such interpretations and reinterpretations of Confucianism constitute one of the most important phenomena in the history of East Asian thought.
Taking the Lunyu as an example, ever since I
t
ōpr
o
mot
e
di
ta
s“
t
hef
i
r
s
t
a
ndf
or
e
mos
twor
ki
nt
heu
ni
v
e
r
s
e
”(
I
t
ō1
9
7
1
:4
)
,i
tha
sbe
e
nwi
de
l
ypr
omoted by Japanese thinkers over the past 300 years; Japan has preserved,
collated, and published certain ancient editions of the Lunyu and its annotations that have long since been lost in China, and thus possess significant
value as textual artifacts. Japanese Confucians of the Tokugawa period were
not subject to the bonds of the examination system, and their interpretations
of the classics were thus relatively free. Since the Meiji period, Japanese
scholars took the lead in applying recent Western methodologies to the study
oft
heEa
s
t
e
r
n“
bi
bl
e
,
”t
heLunyu, with important results achieved thereby.
People from all levels of modern Japanese society are dearly fond of the
Lunyu, and their study of it has never ceased; they have offered all sorts of
novel interpretations and accumulated remarkable achievements. Thus by
studying the history of Lunyu interpretation from the seventeenth to twentieth centuries, not only can we get a glimpse of some important trends in the
recent history of Japanese Sinology (such as the so-c
a
l
l
e
d“
J
a
pa
ne
s
es
ou
l
,
Chi
ne
s
es
u
bs
t
a
nc
e
”
;“
u
n
i
f
or
mi
t
yofS
h
i
nt
oa
nd Conf
u
c
i
a
ni
s
m”
;“
me
t
amor
phos
i
soft
heChi
ne
s
ea
ndba
r
ba
r
i
a
ns
;
”a
nd“
ov
e
r
l
or
doft
heEa
s
t
”
)
,
bu
t
we can also discover some common characteristics in the ethical teachings of
each of the various East Asian countries, as well as their attitudes and re-
237
Huang: East Asian Confucianism
________________________________________________________________
sponses toward Buddhism and Christianity.
J
a
pa
ne
s
eConf
u
c
i
a
ns
’r
e
ne
we
di
nt
e
r
pr
e
t
a
t
i
ons of the Lunyu over the
past 300 years have taken place within the unique spatial-temporal context of
Japan since the Tokug
a
wape
r
i
od
.
Fore
x
a
mp
l
e
,
wha
t
I
TŌJ
i
ns
a
i
f
a
c
e
dwa
st
he
feudal system of the Tokugawa period and its restraints upon thought, in
which the doctrines of ZHU Xi 朱熹 at once transformed into a system of
thought that defended the feudal system; he thus arose in opposition to ZHU
Xi
’
sd
oc
t
r
i
ne
s(
Abe1
9
7
9
:1
6
4
-1
7
7
)
.The
r
ei
sag
r
e
a
td
i
s
pa
r
i
t
yi
nt
he“
c
ont
e
x
t
u
a
l
i
t
y
”ofLunyu interpretations between Japanese and Chinese Confucians. The comparison of this disparity will be of great help in understanding
the history of East Asian thought and the uniqueness of hermeneutics of the
classics within the sphere of East Asian culture. It can thus help to lay a solid
foundation for the construction of a hermeneutics with East Asian characteristics.
The purpose of this essay is to offer a new vision for the study of
history of East Asian Confucianism: it focuses on interpretations of the
Confucian classics by East Asian thinkers from China, Japan, Korea, and
elsewhere since 1000 AD, and, from the standpoint of comparative intellectual history; it analyzes the development and uniqueness of the Confucian
hermeneutic tradition in the early modern history of East Asia, in order to
advance toward the construction of a Confucian hermeneutics. The essay is
divided into five sections: this first section has given a brief introduction to
the study of the interpretation of the classics within the history of East Asian
Confucianism; the second section explains the goals of research in this field;
the third section offers certain suggestions pertaining to the methodology;
the fourth section explores possible directions and topics for such research;
and the final section proposes some prospects for this study of East Asian
hermeneutics.
II. The Goals
II.1. Hermeneutics with East Asian Characteristics
This type of study of the history of East Asian Confucianism centered
upon the interpretation of the classics can help to lay a solid foundation for
a
n“
Ea
s
tAs
i
a
nhe
r
me
ne
u
t
i
c
s
.
”Thi
ss
o-c
a
l
l
e
d“
Ea
s
tAs
i
a
nhe
r
me
ne
u
t
i
c
s
”
refers to a hermeneutics possessing the unique characteristics of East Asian
culture as revealed through the age-old tradition of commentary and
sub-commentary upon the classics within the history of East Asian thought.
In terms of its process of occurrence, this sort of hermeneutics with the
marked characteristics of East Asian culture shares some rough similarities
wi
t
ht
heWe
s
t
e
r
n“
he
r
me
ne
u
t
i
c
s
”
:bot
ha
r
os
ef
r
om as
u
bj
e
c
t
i
v
e“
r
u
pt
u
r
e
”
238
Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy
________________________________________________________________
between the interpreter and the classic, making it difficult to bridge the gap
between them and search for explanat
i
ons
.Thi
s“
r
u
pt
u
r
e
”be
t
we
e
nt
he
subjectivity of the two sides is in large part related to the so-c
a
l
l
e
d“
l
i
ng
u
i
st
i
c
a
l
i
t
y
”ofhu
ma
n
s
:pe
op
l
el
i
v
ewi
t
hi
nt
hes
phe
r
eofl
a
ng
u
a
g
ea
nda
r
et
hu
s
always dwelling in a dialogical relationship with others; there is a deep conne
c
t
i
onbe
t
we
e
npe
opl
e
’
su
nde
r
s
t
a
nd
i
ngof“
t
hepa
s
t
”orofc
l
a
s
s
i
c
sa
ndt
he
operations of language. Owing, however, to the separation of space and time,
t
hephe
nome
nonofe
s
t
r
a
ng
e
me
ntof
t
e
noc
c
u
r
swi
t
hi
npe
opl
e
’
se
x
pe
r
i
e
nc
e
of history, and it is from this that hermeneutics is produced. Looking at it in
terms of its original state, East Asian hermeneutics naturally has aspects that
are deeply marked by the unique characteristics of East Asian culture, and
these are well worth our study.
In East Asian hermeneutics as revealed through the long-standing
tradition of commentary and sub-commentary on the classics, the schools of
Confucianism, Buddhism, and Daoism each have their unique features.
Among them, Confucian hermeneutics most strongly possesses the charact
e
r
i
s
t
i
cofpr
a
c
t
i
c
a
la
p
pl
i
c
a
t
i
ont
og
ov
e
r
na
nc
e
,a
si
t
sc
ont
e
ntof“
pr
a
c
t
i
c
a
l
l
e
a
r
n
i
ng
”(
shixue 實學) is especially pronounced. Taking, for example, interpretations of the Mencius by Confucians throughout the ages, we can see that
Confucian hermeneutics possesses at least three prominent aspects.
1. A Confucian hermeneutics serves as the expression of the path and
e
x
pe
r
i
e
nc
eoft
hei
nt
e
r
pr
e
t
e
r
’
smi
nd
. Many Confucians used commentary on
the classics as a means to express the path through which the mind must
travel as it strives toward the realm of sagacity and worthiness. ZHU Xi, for
example, compiled his collected annotations on the Si Shu 四書 (Four Books) in
order to establish his own philosophy, and offered his interpretation of the
Mencius’
“
k
no
wi
ngwo
r
d
sa
ndc
u
l
t
i
v
a
t
i
ngt
hev
i
t
a
l
e
ne
r
g
y
”(
zhi yan yang qi 知言
養氣) in order to elucidate his own personally experienced understanding of
life; WANG Yangming 王陽明 (1472-1529) interpreted the classics anew from
wi
t
hi
nh
i
spe
r
s
ona
l
u
nde
r
s
t
a
ndi
ngoft
hes
p
i
r
i
t
of“
t
hemi
ndi
spr
i
nc
ipl
e
”(
xin
ji li 心即理)a
ndt
he“
e
x
t
e
ns
i
onofi
nna
t
ek
no
wl
e
d
g
e
”(
zhi liangzhi 致良知) as
g
a
r
ne
r
e
dt
hr
ou
g
hhi
smi
nd
’
se
x
pe
r
i
e
nc
eof“
i
nnu
me
r
a
b
l
ede
a
t
hsa
ndd
i
f
f
icult
i
e
s
.
”
2. A Confucian hermeneutics serves as a doctrine of governance. Since
the political system of imperial China is centered upon the ruler, whereas the
political ideal of Confucianism is centered around the people, many Confucian scholars have had difficulties in fulfilling their ambitions and reconciling
their Confucian ideals with the realities of the political world (see Brandauer
and Huang), and have thus imputed their political ideals of governing the age
and aiding the people into the academic vocation of commentary on the
classics. This type of hermeneutics is a kind of political doctrine, and within
i
t“
t
e
c
hni
q
u
e
sofs
t
a
t
e
c
r
a
f
t
”a
r
emu
c
hmor
epr
e
v
a
l
e
ntt
ha
nt
he“
pr
i
nc
i
p
l
e
sof
239
Huang: East Asian Confucianism
________________________________________________________________
g
ov
e
r
na
nc
e
.
”Fore
x
a
mpl
e
,KANG You
we
i康有為 (1859-1927) wrote his
Mengzi Wei《孟子微》(Subtleties of the Mencius) in the crisis years of the twentieth
century when Western powers were threatening to swallow up China piece by
piece, and thus imputed his great plan for saving the age into his academic
works.
3. A Confucian hermeneutics serves to defend the teaching.
Throughout the ages, there has never been a lack of Confucians using
commentary and sub-commentary on the classics as a weapon to attack
Buddhism and Daoism and defend Confucianism. WANG Yangmi
ng
’
s王陽
明c
r
i
t
i
c
i
s
m ofZHUXi
’
sd
oc
t
r
i
ne
st
hr
ou
g
hhi
so
wnr
e
ne
we
di
nt
e
r
pr
etation
of the classics, and Qing 清 d
y
na
s
t
yConf
u
c
i
a
nDAIZhe
n
’
s戴震 (1724-1777)
sharp refutation of the thought of the Song Confucians as well as the
Buddhists and Daoist, are representative examples of this type of East Asian
hermeneutics.
Of these three prominent aspects of East Asian Confucian hermeneutics as revealed through the history of Mencius interpretation, the first is
of the greatest importance. Confucians throughout the ages have often used
commentary on classics either as a means by which to secure themselves and
establish their missions, or as a method for expressing their own inner experience in striving toward the realm of sagacity—such are examples of the
Conf
u
c
i
a
ni
de
aof“
l
e
a
r
ni
ngf
ort
hes
e
l
f
”(
wei ji zhi xue 為己之學), and weaving
t
og
e
t
he
ra
sonee
x
p
l
a
na
t
i
onoft
hec
l
a
s
s
i
c
sa
ndone
’
spe
r
s
ona
ll
i
f
ei
st
het
r
adi
t
i
ona
l
me
t
hodoft
hou
g
htk
no
wna
s“
me
l
d
i
ngt
heol
dt
oc
a
s
tt
hene
w”(
rong
jiu yi zhu xin 融舊以鑄新). The second aspect concer
nst
hei
nt
e
r
pr
e
t
e
r
’
sv
i
s
i
on
of the prospects for the social and political worlds. The interpreter seeks, via
the route of renewed interpretation of the classics, to offer measures by
which to solve the social and political problems he faces—this is a mode of
t
hou
g
htk
no
wna
s“
r
e
t
u
r
ni
n
gt
ot
her
oot
st
obr
i
ngf
or
t
ht
hene
w”(
fan ben yi
kai xin 返本以開新). The third aspect is when the interpreter resides in an
environment of intense agitation by various trends of thought, and in order
to manifest the orthodoxy of the system of thought with which he identifies,
he utilizes the renewed interpretation oft
hec
l
a
s
s
i
c
st
owa
r
dof
ft
he“
u
nor
t
hod
o
x
”t
hou
g
ht
—t
hi
si
sak
i
ndo
fmod
eo
ft
hou
g
htk
no
wna
s“
wa
s
hi
ng
of
ft
hemu
dd
yt
opr
omot
et
hec
l
e
a
r
”(
ji zhuo yi yang qing 激濁以揚清) (see
Huang 1977: 471-472).
II.2. Characteristics of East Asian Modes of Thinking
This type of comparative study of East Asian Confucianism will also,
to a certain extent, benefit our understanding of East Asian modes of
thinking. Each type of East Asian hermeneutics is deeply permeated within
the Chinese tradition of education through the Odes (Shi《詩》). This tradition
often utilizes the stimulus arising from aesthetic experience to awaken a
240
Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy
________________________________________________________________
pe
r
s
on
’
spe
r
c
e
pt
u
a
lore
t
hi
c
a
ls
u
bj
e
c
t
i
v
i
t
y(
s
e
eVa
nZoe
r
e
n)
.The
r
ea
r
ec
e
rt
a
i
nl
yd
i
f
f
e
r
e
ntme
t
hodsi
ne
x
pr
e
s
s
i
ngt
hi
s“
e
v
oc
a
t
i
on”(
xing 興) mode of
thought withinEa
s
tAs
i
a
nc
u
l
t
u
r
e
,bu
tt
hei
mpu
t
a
t
i
onofone
’
st
h
ou
g
ht
s
through interpretation of the classics is the most commonly seen method:
some express their personal experiences in striving toward the realm of
sagacity; some grief-strickenly lay forth the faults of the age and impute a
philosophy of governance into their career of commentators on the classics;
a
nds
ome“
wa
s
hof
ft
hemu
d
dyt
opr
o
mot
et
hec
l
e
a
r
,
”u
s
i
ngi
nt
e
r
pr
e
t
a
t
i
onof
the classics to rebuke unorthodox sects—in all such cases there is no employment of stiff logical demonstration, but rather the communication of
intent is paramount, amply demonstrating a uniquely characteristic mode of
thinking within East Asian culture. Up until the present juncture, however,
though there have been numerous studies on the history of East Asian
thought within Sinological circles over the past fifty years, relatively few have
engaged in any discussion of the modes of thinking or theoretical foundations that lay behind such thought.
S
t
u
d
yof“
mode
soft
hi
nk
i
ng
”ha
sl
ong been an important topic of
interest to philosophers. Since the publication of anthropologist Lucien
Levi-Br
u
hl
’
s(
1
8
5
7
-1939) Primitive Mentality, anthropologists and sociologists
have also been led to throw themselves into this field of research. In recent
years, on the heels of developments in computer science and artificial intell
i
g
e
nc
e
,s
t
u
dyof“
mod
e
so
ft
h
i
nk
i
ng
”ha
st
a
k
e
nonf
r
e
s
hs
i
g
ni
f
icance. In
studies of the history of East Asian thought, however, mode of thinking is a
seldom-broached area of inquiry. Traditional historical research has emphasized the reconstruction or elucidation of historical events, or offered causal
explanations for historical phenomena. However, researchers have neglected
the manner in which people recognize themselves and the worlds in which
they live; how they think about problems and construct world-views; how
such world-views interpenetrate or influence their natural and social envir
onme
nt
s
.
Ye
t
i
t
i
si
mpor
t
a
nt
t
os
t
u
dy“
mode
so
ft
hi
nk
i
ng
”be
c
a
u
s
et
hi
si
s
s
u
e
touches direct
l
yu
pont
her
e
a
l
mof“
t
a
c
i
t
k
no
wi
ng
”i
nherent in the East Asian
cultural tradition (see Polanyi). Engagement in the in-depth analysis of this
issue can strengthen our understanding of the so-c
a
l
l
e
d“
de
e
p-level struct
u
r
e
s
”wi
t
hi
nt
hec
u
l
t
u
r
a
l
a
ndi
nt
e
l
l
e
c
t
ual traditions of East Asia.
Concerning East Asian modes of thinking, Japanese scholar NAKAMURAHa
j
i
me
’
s中村元 (1912-) massive, four-volume Ways of Thinking of
Eastern Peoples 《東洋人の思維方法》must count as one of the earlier and more
comprehensive works. First, he looks at modes of language expression, especially grammatical structure, to explain the modes of thinking that are
reflected therein. Second, centering on Indian culture, he first explores the
Indian modes of thinking as reflected through its language, and then explores
the Chinese and Japanese modes of thinking as seen through the ways in
241
Huang: East Asian Confucianism
________________________________________________________________
which they accept the foreign culture of Indian Buddhism in the process of
its transmission into China and Japan. Given Nak
a
mu
r
a
’
sr
e
l
a
t
i
v
e
l
yd
e
e
p
expertise of Indian Buddhism, it makes good sense for him to undertake his
research through the study of Indian modes of thinking. The first of Nak
a
mu
r
a
’
sr
e
s
e
a
r
c
hme
t
hod
si
nv
ol
v
e
sama
j
ori
s
s
u
ei
nt
hes
t
u
dyoft
h
i
nk
i
ng
:
some claim that language determines thinking, because language is the only
tool of thinking. This point of view has been quite popular recently, and
Nakamura for the most part adopts such a point of view. In recent years,
however, such scholars as CHEN Xinxia 陳新夏 have believed instead that
thinking determines language (see Chen). In fact, whether they hold that
language determines thinking or that thinking determines language, both
sides believe that language and thinking are intimately related, and thus that
language can to some degree reflect modes of thinking.1
III. Methodology
Methods of comparative study of the history of East Asian Confucianism
will differ according to the scope, topic, and subject. For example, using
European intellectual history as a model, MARUYAMA Masao 丸山真男
(1914-1996) once proposed that study of Japanese intellectual history could
be approached via three different avenues: (1) history of doctrine; (2) history
of ideas; and (3) history of Spirit (Geistesgeschichte) (see Maruyama 1961: 6-8).
His arguments differ greatly from those of European and American scholars.
I
S
HI
DAI
c
hi
r
ō石田一良 (1913-), on the basis of the acumen gained from his
longstanding study of Japanese intellectual history, also once proposed three
subjects for research in intellectual history: (1) highly systematic thought; (2)
pre-logos modes of consciousness; and (3) thought that serves as a way of life
(Ishida 1996: 134-136). I would like to open up a new path, involving two
possible approaches by which to contemplate and study East Asian hermeneutics, from the two angles of linguisticality and contextuality inherent in it.
III.1. History of Ideas Method
The“
hi
s
t
or
y
-of-i
de
a
sme
t
hod
”r
e
f
e
r
st
o(
1
)t
hef
oc
u
s
e
dr
esearch upon
such important ideas in the history of East Asian Confucianism as xin 心
(mind/heart), xing 性 (nature), dao 道 (way), jiao 教 (teaching), tianming 天命
Aside from this approach, others have explored modes of thinking from the standpoint of
comparative culture (see Song 1991 & Muneshima 1977). There are several achievements on
Chinese modes of thinking in recent years (see Yang & Huang 1996, Wu 1997, and Yang 1998).
Yet there is still room for further development in this area; by focusing on the phenomena of
interpretation of the classics by East Asian Confucians in recent ages, we can analyze in depth
the unique characteristics of East Asian modes of thinking.
1
242
Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy
________________________________________________________________
(mandate of Heaven), etc.; (2) the in-depth analysis of what kind of new
interpretations such ideas garner through exegesis of the classics by Chinese,
Japanese, and Korean Confucians; and (3) an analysis of the intellectual-historical and philosophical implications of such disparity in the interpretations of identical concepts. Using this method, together with the development of certain ideas in the history of exegesis of classics, we can
observe the prevailing currents through the droplets, and analyze how, in the
ha
nd
sofEa
s
t
As
i
a
ni
nt
e
r
pr
e
t
e
r
soft
hec
l
a
s
s
i
c
st
h
r
ou
g
hou
tt
hea
g
e
s
,
t
he“
ol
d
bot
t
l
e
”oft
hec
l
a
s
s
i
c
si
sf
i
l
l
e
dwi
t
h“
ne
wwi
ne
”(
Cha
n1
9
6
2&Cha
n1
9
6
7
)
,
a
s
well as ta
s
t
et
hef
l
a
v
orofs
u
c
h“
ne
wwi
ne
.
”
Fore
x
a
mpl
e
,
Me
nc
i
u
s
’
doc
t
r
i
neof“
k
nowi
ngwor
d
sa
ndc
u
l
t
i
v
a
t
i
ngt
he
v
i
t
a
l
e
ne
r
g
y
”(
Mencius 2A2) is concisely worded and terse in meaning, full of
rich implications; many of the singular ideas within it and the interpretations
given them are worthy of in-depth analysis. In particular, the idea of
“
k
no
wi
ngwor
ds
”pos
s
e
s
s
e
sg
r
e
a
ts
i
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
nc
ei
nt
hehi
s
t
or
yofEa
s
tAs
i
a
n
Conf
u
c
i
a
ni
s
m.ZHUXie
x
pl
a
i
ne
dMe
nc
i
u
s
’“
k
no
wi
ngwor
ds
”a
s“
k
nowi
ng
princ
i
p
l
e
”(
zhili 知理)a
ndbe
l
i
e
v
e
dt
ha
tt
he“
mi
nd”(
xin 心) possesses the
a
bi
l
i
t
yt
o“
k
no
w;
”t
ha
tt
he
r
ei
snod
i
s
pa
r
i
t
ybe
t
we
e
nt
hes
u
bstance and
f
u
nc
t
i
on,t
hema
ni
f
e
s
ta
nds
u
bt
l
e
,oft
he“
mi
nd
”
;t
ha
ti
tc
a
n“
e
x
ha
u
s
tpr
i
nc
i
pl
ea
ndf
u
l
l
yi
nt
e
g
r
a
t
e
”(
Zhu
:1
3
.
1
a
)
;a
ndt
ha
ta
ti
t
s greatest height it can
r
e
a
c
ht
hepoi
ntwhe
r
e“
t
he
r
ei
snop
r
i
nc
i
pl
eofa
ny
t
h
i
ngi
nt
hewor
l
dwhi
c
h
i
t
sk
no
wl
e
dg
ec
a
nnotr
e
a
c
h”(
Zhu1
9
8
6
:
1
.
1
5
.
2
9
6
)
.
ZHUXi
a
l
s
os
a
i
dt
ha
t“
t
o
k
no
wwo
r
dsi
snoneot
he
rt
ha
nt
oe
x
ha
u
s
tpr
i
nc
i
p
l
e
”(
i
bi
d
.
)
.
Thei
nt
e
r
pr
e
t
ation of Menc
i
u
s
’“
k
no
wi
ngwor
d
s
”t
ha
tZHUXiof
f
e
r
e
dc
onf
or
msc
l
os
e
l
y
with his interpretat
i
onofMe
nc
i
u
s
’
not
i
onof“
a
c
c
u
mu
l
a
t
i
ngr
i
g
ht
e
ou
s
ne
s
s
”
(jiyi 集義)
.
I
nZHUXi
’
sv
i
e
w,
“
‘
a
c
c
u
mu
l
a
t
i
ngr
i
g
hte
ou
s
ne
s
s
’
i
sl
i
k
e‘
s
t
or
i
ngu
p
g
oodne
s
s
’
(
jishan 積善); it means something like wanting each and every event
to conform to righte
ou
s
ne
s
s
”(
Zhu1
9
8
3
:
3
.
2
3
2
)
;
i
t“
me
a
nss
i
mpl
yt
ha
tt
he
r
e
is nothing in which one does nots
t
r
i
v
ef
orc
or
r
e
c
t
ne
s
s
”(
Zhu 1
9
8
6
:
4
.
5
2
.
1
2
5
9
)
;i
t“
me
a
n
ss
i
mpl
yt
ha
twhe
ne
a
c
ha
nde
v
e
r
ye
v
e
ntc
onforms to
wha
ti
spr
ope
r
,
[
r
i
g
ht
e
ou
s
ne
s
s
]wi
l
l
na
t
u
r
a
l
l
ys
t
or
eu
pi
ng
r
e
a
tq
u
a
nt
i
t
y
”(
Zhu
1
9
8
6
:4
.
5
2
.
1
2
5
9
)
.Hea
l
s
os
a
i
d
,“
ji’集 is like ju 聚 (to gather together). To
handle all things with righteousness (chu wu wei yi 處物為義) requires that each
and every event conform to righteousne
s
s
”(
i
bi
d
.
)
.He
r
e
,ZHUXie
x
p
l
a
i
ns
t
he“
ji 集”ofMe
nc
i
u
s
’jiyi a
s“
g
a
t
he
rt
og
e
t
he
r
”(
ju 聚), and the yi 義 as the
manifold principles (li 理 )ofa
l
lt
hi
ng
sa
nde
v
e
nt
s
.“
Ac
c
u
mu
l
a
t
i
ngr
i
g
hte
ou
s
ne
s
s
”t
hu
s
,f
orZHU Xi
,me
a
nsak
i
ndofi
nt
e
l
l
e
c
t
u
a
la
c
t
i
v
i
t
yofg
a
t
hering up the manifold principles of each and every thing and event.
ZHU Xi
’
si
nt
e
r
pr
e
t
a
t
i
onoft
henot
i
onsof“
k
no
wi
ngwor
ds
”a
nd
“
c
u
l
t
i
v
a
t
i
ngt
hev
i
t
a
l
e
ne
r
g
y
”i
nc
i
t
e
dt
hei
nt
e
ns
ec
r
i
t
i
c
i
s
mofl
a
t
e
rConf
u
c
i
a
ns
.
WANG Shouren 王守仁 (Yangming 陽明, 1472-1
5
2
9
)e
x
pl
a
i
ne
d“
a
c
c
u
mul
a
t
i
ngr
i
g
ht
e
ou
s
ne
s
s
”a
s“
e
x
t
e
ndi
ngi
nna
t
ek
no
wl
e
d
g
e
”(
zhi liangzhi 致良知), an
243
Huang: East Asian Confucianism
________________________________________________________________
interpretation widely divergent from ZHUXi
’
s
.
La
t
eMi
ngs
c
hol
a
rHUANG
Zongxi 黃宗羲 (Lizhou 梨洲, 1610-1
6
9
5
)a
t
t
a
c
k
e
dZHU Xi
’
si
nt
e
r
pr
e
t
a
t
i
on,
holding that in his two-part separation of events and principles he comes
c
l
os
et
oGa
oz
i
’
sd
oc
t
r
i
neof“
r
i
g
ht
e
ou
s
ne
s
si
se
x
t
e
r
na
l
”(
yi wai 義外). The
Japanese Tokugawa Confucian NAKAI Riken 中井履軒 (1732-1817) critic
i
z
e
dZHU Xi
’
se
x
p
l
a
nat
i
ona
s“
di
l
i
g
e
nti
nt
hewor
kof[
s
e
l
f
-]control, but
s
l
i
g
hti
n[
br
i
ng
i
ngou
t
]t
hes
e
ns
eofe
x
pa
ns
i
ona
ndf
u
l
f
i
l
l
me
nt
.
”I
TŌ J
i
n
s
a
i
opened a large-s
c
a
l
ea
t
t
a
c
ko
nZHUXi
’
sCollected Commentaries on the Four Books
《四書集註》from a monist position, pointing out the inappropriateness of
ZHUXi
’
si
nt
e
r
pr
e
t
ation of zhi 知 (
t
ok
no
w)i
n“
k
no
wi
n
gwor
ds
.
”Ev
e
nt
he
Chôson-dynasty (1392-1910) Korean Confucian CHONG Yap-yong 丁若鏞
(Das-han 茶山, 1762-1836
)c
r
i
t
i
c
i
z
e
dZHU Xi
,be
l
i
e
v
i
ngt
ha
tZhu
’
si
nt
e
rpretat
i
onof“
notbe
i
ngs
t
i
r
r
e
di
nt
hemi
nd”(
bu dong xin 不動心) departed
f
r
om Me
nc
i
u
s
’or
i
g
i
na
lme
a
ni
ng
.Ev
e
ni
nt
het
we
nt
i
e
t
h(
a
ndt
we
nt
y
-first)
century there are many contemporary scholars of Confucianism who have
be
e
nu
na
bl
et
og
i
v
et
he
i
rs
t
a
mpofa
pp
r
o
v
a
lt
oZHUXi
’
si
nt
e
r
p
r
e
t
a
t
i
onof
“
k
no
wi
ngwo
r
d
sa
ndc
u
l
t
i
v
a
t
i
ngt
hev
i
t
a
l
e
ne
r
g
y
”(
Hu
a
ng1
9
9
7
:
1
9
1
-252).
The innumerable twists, turns, and side-paths that interpretations of
“
k
no
wi
ngwor
d
sa
ndc
u
l
t
i
v
a
t
i
ngt
hev
i
t
a
l
e
ne
r
g
y
”ha
v
et
a
k
e
nc
onc
r
e
t
e
l
yr
e
v
e
a
l
the great course of shifting trends in East Asian Confucian thought over the
past 800 years. In adopting a history-of-ideas method to explore the history
of interpretation of classics, we should pay special attention to the following
i
s
s
u
e
s
:(
1
)Wha
ta
r
et
he“
u
ni
ti
de
a
s
”t
ha
ta
r
ei
nc
l
u
de
dwi
t
h
i
nt
hes
y
stems,
schools, or trends of Confucian thought? What is the structural or hierarc
hi
c
a
lr
e
l
a
t
i
ons
hi
pa
mongs
u
c
h“
u
ni
ti
de
a
s
?
”(
2
)Wh
a
tk
i
ndof“
t
a
c
i
t
”
“
g
r
a
mma
r
”or“
deep-l
e
v
e
ls
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
s
”a
r
el
a
t
e
nti
nt
hes
y
s
t
e
m ofConf
u
c
i
a
n
interpretation of the classics? (3) What sort of theoretical comprehensiveness does the system of Confucian interpretation of the classics have?
(Huang 1997: 22-23).
Fore
x
a
mpl
e
,t
he“
di
s
t
i
nc
t
i
onbe
t
we
e
nr
i
g
ht
e
ou
s
ne
s
sa
ndpr
of
i
t
”(
yi li
zhi bian 義利之辨) in the Menciuss is not at all an independent pair of opposing
concepts, but one that forms an organic, mutually-permeating relationship
with such not
i
onsa
st
he“
d
i
v
i
s
i
onbe
t
we
e
npu
bl
i
ca
ndpr
i
v
a
t
e
”(gong si zhi fen
公私之分)
a
nd“
t
hed
i
f
f
e
r
e
nc
ebe
t
we
e
nk
i
nga
ndheg
e
mon”(
wang ba zhi bie 王
霸之別). Many Confucians from all over East Asia have argued that kings
pr
e
s
e
r
v
et
he
i
rmi
ndst
hr
ou
g
ht
he“
pu
bl
i
c
,
”ha
v
et
hec
ou
r
a
g
et
oa
c
tu
pon
“
r
i
g
ht
e
ou
s
ne
s
s
”whe
nt
he
ys
e
e it, take the welfare of the people as their
s
t
a
nda
r
d
,
a
ndt
hu
sc
r
e
a
t
ea“
g
r
e
a
tpr
of
i
t
”(
da li 大利) to share with the people;
he
g
e
mons
,
ont
heot
he
rha
nd
,
pr
oc
e
e
df
r
omt
henot
i
onof“
s
e
l
f
-g
a
i
n”(
si 私),
f
or
g
e
t“
r
i
g
hte
ou
s
ne
s
s
”whe
nt
he
ys
e
e“
pr
o
f
i
t
,
”a
c
tou
tof egoism (wei wo 為我)
in everything they do, and monopolize all advantages for themselves. These
three interrelated pairs of complimentary notions in the Mencius have un-
244
Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy
________________________________________________________________
dergone different twists and transformations in the hermeneutic tradition of
East Asian Confucians depending upon the person, school, or era in question;
mor
e
ov
e
r
,t
het
hr
e
ei
nf
a
c
tt
a
k
e“
s
ha
r
i
ngv
e
r
s
u
smonopol
iz
a
t
i
on”a
st
he
i
r
“
g
r
a
mma
r
.
”Al
lt
hr
e
epa
i
r
sf
or
ma
nor
g
a
ni
cr
e
l
ationship with each other. A
pull of one hair moves the entire body, and thus when we adopt the history-of-ideas method in decoding the history of East Asian Confucian exegesis of the classics, we should pay special attention to the organic interrelationship of many notions within the interpretive systems of Confucians
from China, Japan, and Korea.
Of further note is that China, in fact, lay at the center of the historical
development of East Asian Confucian exegesis of the classics: in terms of
temporal order, many systems of interpretation first appeared in China, and
were then transmitted through Korea before making their way to Japan; there
is a temporal progression to their development. When taking the history-of-ideas approach, we can pay special attention to the step-by-step
progression through which such ideas are proliferated as they move from
China on into Korea and Japan.
III.2. Intellectual History Method
Us
i
ngt
he“
i
nt
e
l
l
e
c
t
u
a
lhi
s
t
or
yme
t
hod
,
”wea
na
l
y
z
et
heEa
s
tAs
i
a
n
Conf
u
c
i
a
ni
nt
e
r
pr
e
t
a
t
i
onoft
hec
l
a
s
s
i
c
sa
ss
i
t
u
a
t
e
dwi
t
hi
nt
hei
nt
e
r
pr
e
t
e
r
’
s
spatial-temporal context. Such a method pays special attention to the following issues: (a) in what sort of historical context and particular environment does the interpreter decode the classics? (b) in what sort of historical
environment do the issues or ideals latent in the classics become problematized? (c) what sort of mutually-influential relationship do the time-period of
the classic and that of the interpreter have with each other?
Some examples can illustrate the practical applications of this method.
The first example involves the history of Mencius interpretation.
Song-dynasty intellectuals and thinkers once engaged in fierce debate over
Me
nc
i
u
s
’pol
i
t
i
c
a
lt
hou
g
h
t
.Th
i
sde
ba
t
ea
ndi
t
sr
i
c
hi
mpl
i
c
a
t
i
onsmu
s
tbe
placed in the context of Song-dynasty political history before they can be
accurately grasped. I once pointed out about the study of this issue that, from
t
heNor
t
he
r
nS
ongond
o
wn,t
hef
l
a
s
hpoi
nti
nt
hede
ba
t
eo
v
e
rMe
nc
i
u
s
’
pol
i
t
i
c
a
lt
hou
g
htwa
s
,f
orS
ongi
nt
e
l
l
e
c
t
u
a
l
s
,Me
nc
i
u
s
’non-reverence of the
king of Zhou 周 and his travels to persuade the various feudal lords on how to
unify the world (Huang 1997: 127-190 & Huang 2000). The reason why
Me
nc
i
u
s
’n
on-reverence of the King of Zhou would become a flashpoint
had, in fact, to do with the unique background of Northern-Song political
history. Looking at it from within the larger environment of the Northern
Song since its founding, the doctrines of the distinct natures of king and
hegemon and the opposition of ruler and minister latent in the fact of
245
Huang: East Asian Confucianism
________________________________________________________________
Me
nc
i
u
s
’
non-reverence of the King of Zhou mixed like fire and water with
both the centrally controlled political system of the Northern Song and its
pol
i
t
i
c
a
l
ph
i
l
os
oph
yof“
r
e
v
e
r
e
nc
ef
ort
hek
i
ng
.
”I
ns
of
a
ra
sWANGAn
s
hi
王
安石 raised Mencius in particular as the spiritual standard for his legal reforms,
Me
nc
i
u
si
mpe
r
c
e
pt
i
bl
ybe
c
a
met
hema
n
i
f
e
s
t
of
o
rWa
ng
’
sr
e
f
or
mmo
v
e
me
nt
,
and thus invariably provoked the criticism of those who opposed the
movement. Under the confluence of two such major factors in political
hi
s
t
o
r
y
,
Me
nc
i
u
s
’
non-reverence of the King of Zhou eventually became the
common target of attack, inciting the debate over Mencian learning by Song
intellectuals.
Implicit in the distinction between king and hegemon that formed part
of this debate was the opposition between the two political attitudes of
idealism and realism. On the one hand, those Song Confucians who defended
Me
nc
i
u
s
’pr
omot
i
onofk
i
ng
s
hi
po
v
e
rhegemony generally held idealistic
positions, taking the ide
a
l
i
z
e
d“
t
hr
e
ed
y
na
st
i
e
s
”a
st
he
i
rpol
i
t
i
c
a
ls
t
a
nda
r
d
,
and Yao 堯 and Shun 舜 as their models for emulation—WANG Anshi was a
prototypical example. On the other hand, those Song Confucians who criticized Mencius tended to look upon the three dynasties in the same way as
they did the Qin 秦, Han 漢, Sui 隋, and Tang 唐 dynasties, discussing politics
from a realist position—SIMA Guang 司馬光 (Junshi 君實, 1019-1086) was a
representative figure. Also, the issue of the distinction between ruler and
minister began with Menci
u
s
’
pr
opos
a
l
t
ha
t“
r
u
l
e
r
swhowou
l
da
c
hi
e
v
eg
r
e
a
t
t
hi
ng
smu
s
tha
v
emi
n
i
s
t
e
r
swhom t
he
ywou
l
dnots
u
mmon.
”Me
nc
i
u
s
’doctrine of opposition between ruler and minister was in fact rooted in the
historical backdrop of the Warring States (403-221 BC), in which the prestige
of the scholarly class (shi 士) reached a high point and most of the rulers were
fond of warfare and profit. Song Confucians, however, criticized Mencius
from within the context of Song history, as when SIMA Guang roundly
attacked Mencius on the basis of his own political philosophy rooted in the
doc
t
r
i
neof“
t
i
t
l
e
sa
ndpos
i
t
i
ons
”(
mingfen lun 名分論), and from the standpoi
ntofhi
spol
i
t
i
c
a
loppos
i
t
i
ont
oWANG Ans
hi
’
sne
wl
a
ws
.Me
nc
i
u
s
’
non-reverence of the King of Zhou and his encouragement of the feudal
lords to unite the world and become its new king directly incited the
king-versus-hegemon issue, and thus his non-reverence of the King of Zhou
i
nv
a
r
i
a
bl
yi
nv
o
l
v
e
dMe
nc
i
u
s
’
de
f
ini
t
i
onof“
k
i
ng
”a
n
di
t
ss
u
bs
t
a
nt
i
v
ec
ont
e
nt
.
Whe
nS
ongCon
f
u
c
i
a
nsr
e
a
dMe
nc
i
u
s
’doc
t
r
i
neofk
i
ng
-versus-hegemon,
they contempl
a
t
e
dt
henot
i
onsof“
k
i
ng
”a
nd“
he
g
e
mon”noton
l
yf
r
om
wi
t
hi
nt
hec
ont
e
x
tofMe
nc
i
u
s
’
pol
i
t
i
c
a
l
phi
l
o
s
oph
y
,
bu
ta
l
s
of
r
omwi
t
h
i
nt
he
unique context of Song-dynasty politics and philosophy. Thus, the threat that
Me
nc
i
u
s
’doc
t
r
i
neofk
i
ng
-versus-hegemon posed to the Song power structure became broadly manifest; and it should come as no surprise that it would
incite a fierce debate between the pro- and anti-Mencius factions.
246
Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy
________________________________________________________________
Song-dynasty Confucians expressed their political ideals and aspirations
through their renewed interpretation of Mencian thought. In substance, then,
their hermeneutics is none other than a kind of political doctrine; and even
more worthy of note is that this type of politics is, to great extent, a kind of
moral doctrine. When supporters and attackers of Mencius debates about the
distinction between king and hegemon, the division between ruler and minister, and the issue of reverence for Confucius, they at all points employed
terminology full of moral content and strived toward the goal of morality.
Basically, they discussed political issues from within a moral context. From
this case we can discover that the realistic inclinations within Chinese Confucian hermeneutics are particularly strong. Chinese interpreters of the
classics do not in fact engage in interpretation for its own sake, but rather in
order to cleanse, manage, or even save the age in which they live. Within the
pol
i
t
i
c
a
l
t
r
a
d
i
t
i
onofChi
ne
s
eConf
u
c
i
a
nhe
r
me
ne
u
t
i
c
s
,
q
u
e
s
t
i
onso
f“
i
s
”a
nd
“
ou
g
ht
”t
hu
sbe
c
omep
r
of
o
u
ndl
yu
ni
f
i
e
d
,j
u
d
g
me
nt
sof“
f
a
c
t
”a
nd“
v
a
l
u
e
”
i
nt
e
g
r
a
t
ei
nt
oas
i
ng
l
ewhol
e
,a
nd“
r
e
t
r
os
pe
c
t
i
v
e
”i
nt
e
r
pr
e
t
a
t
i
onsoft
he
Conf
u
c
i
a
nc
l
a
s
s
i
c
sbe
c
omes
e
a
ml
e
s
s
l
yf
u
s
e
dwi
t
h“
pr
os
pe
c
t
i
v
e
”pr
og
r
a
msf
or
the future.
The second example is the interpretation of Confucian poetry by
Taiwanese poets during the period of Japanese occupation (1895-1945). In a
recent study, CHEN Zhaoying 陳昭瑛 pointed out that,
As a component of traditional Han culture, Confucian poetics in the period of
Japanese occupation faced, along with traditional culture, two severe tests: one
was the threat of assimilation by the foreign colonists and the loss of literary
he
r
i
t
a
g
e
;t
heot
he
rwa
st
heoppor
t
u
ni
t
yf
ora
c
hi
e
v
i
ng“
mode
r
nt
r
a
ns
f
or
ma
t
i
on”
under the challenge of a new cultural movement. These two major factors shaped
the unique style of Confucian poetics during the period of Japanese occupation.
The pain of losing the country and the pressures of foreign assimilation caused
c
r
i
t
i
c
st
opr
omot
et
hev
a
l
u
eoft
he“
t
r
a
ns
f
or
me
dAi
r
sa
ndEl
e
g
a
ntiae”(
bian feng
bian ya 變風變雅), a value choice at great odds with that of traditional Confucian
poe
t
i
c
s
,whe
r
e
i
nt
he“
pr
ope
rc
l
a
s
s
i
c
s
”we
r
epl
a
c
e
da
bo
v
et
he“
t
r
a
ns
f
or
me
dAi
r
s
a
ndEl
e
g
a
n
t
i
a
e
”i
nt
hec
a
non.
I
nt
e
r
msoft
heo
v
e
r
a
l
l
s
pi
r
i
tofConf
u
c
i
a
ni
s
m,
t
he
influence of ZHU Xi learning had gradually started to wane in the late Qing 清.
The similar experience of losing the country caused Confucianism in the period
of Japanese occupation to return to the practical spirit of the Confucianism of
the southern Ming 明. In poetics, this was expressed through the repeated emphasis upon the functions of Odes in moral teaching and practical governance.
Compared to the form of antagonistic competition between Confucianism and
Buddhism (especially Chan) that had marked the poetic tradition since the Song
and Ming, this period of poetics in Taiwan was one in which Confucianism alone
held the day. (Z. Chen: 252-3)
The third example is the interpretation made by LI Chunsheng 李春生
(1838-1924), a Taiwanese lay-intellectual during the period of Japanese occupation. Li was a fervent Christian who achieved great wealth through
business. He wrote many works in his later years and offered numerous in-
247
Huang: East Asian Confucianism
________________________________________________________________
terpretations of the Confucian classics, as with such sayings, found especially
in the Zhongyong《中庸》, a
s“
pa
r
t
i
c
i
pa
t
i
ngi
nt
henu
r
t
u
r
i
ngt
r
a
ns
f
or
ma
t
i
onsof
He
a
v
e
na
ndEa
r
t
h,
”“
f
or
mi
ngat
r
i
a
dwi
t
hHe
a
v
e
na
n
dEa
r
t
h,
”a
nd“
e
xha
u
s
t
i
ngt
hehe
i
g
ht
sofHe
a
v
e
n.
”Thi
si
sbe
c
a
u
s
es
u
c
hs
a
y
i
ng
snot
only affirm
hu
ma
ns
’
u
ni
q
u
ep
l
a
c
ei
nt
heu
ni
v
e
r
s
e
,
bu
ta
l
s
oe
l
e
v
a
t
et
he
i
rposition to a level
where they form the third member of a triad on a par with Heaven and Earth.
Given his Christian background, this was impossible for Li to accept, as it was
tantamountt
ode
ny
i
ngGod
’
st
r
a
nscendence and was a serious insult to God.
LI Minghui 李明輝 has recently pointed out that LI Chunsheng basically
adopted two hermeneutic strategies in his interpretations of the Confucian
classics:
On the one hand, he emphasized that most of these phrases appear in the second
half of the Zhongyong, that they “
we
r
ephr
a
s
e
st
r
a
ns
mi
t
t
e
db
yZi
s
i子思, and did
notc
omef
r
omConf
u
c
i
u
shi
ms
e
l
f
.
”Ont
heot
he
rha
nd,
hed
e
v
i
s
e
dwa
y
st
odi
l
u
t
e
the implications of those phrases that were in conflict with Christian viewpoints,
i
nt
e
r
pr
e
t
i
ng“
pa
r
t
i
c
i
pa
t
i
ngi
nt
hen
u
r
t
u
r
i
ngt
r
ansformations of Heaven and
Ea
r
t
h”i
nt
hes
e
ns
eof“
u
s
i
nghu
ma
ne
f
f
or
t
st
oa
s
s
i
s
ti
nHe
a
v
e
n
’
swor
k
s
,
”a
swe
l
l
a
su
nde
r
s
t
a
ndi
ngt
hephr
a
s
e“
f
or
mat
r
i
a
d”i
n“
f
or
mi
ngat
r
i
a
dwi
t
hHe
a
v
e
na
nd
Ea
r
t
h”i
nt
hes
e
ns
eoft
hecan 參 of canzhan 參贊 (assist) rather than a
s“
onapa
ra
s
t
het
hi
r
dme
mbe
r
”(
ping lie wei san 並列為三)
.Asf
or“
e
x
ha
u
s
t
i
ngt
hehe
i
g
ht
sof
He
a
v
e
n,
”t
hi
swa
sag
r
e
a
t
l
ye
x
a
g
g
e
r
a
t
e
ds
a
y
i
ng
,
whe
r
e
i
n“
t
hea
u
t
horl
os
tt
hes
e
ns
e
ofc
a
u
t
i
on,
a
ndt
het
r
a
ns
mi
t
t
e
rl
a
c
k
e
du
nde
r
s
t
a
ndi
ng
.
”(
Li
2
0
0
1
)
Here we see how a Confucian classic could garner an entirely different interpretation within the context of Christian thought.
From the above, we see how the East Asian Confucian interpretation
of the classics took place within a complex political, social, and economic
web, and thus when we study the history of East Asian Confucian hermeneutics, we must pay attention to the historical context within which the
interpreter lives before we can accurately grasp his or her motives. For example, it is only from within the histor
i
c
a
l
ba
c
k
g
r
ou
ndofZHUXi
’
sd
oc
t
r
i
ne
s
becoming the official ideology that we can understand why East Asian
Confucians from the seventeenth century onward, in Qing 清 dynasty China
(1644-1911), Tokugawa Japan, and Chôson-dynasty Korea (1392-1910),
engaged in such ruthless attack and criticism of the metaphysical world
c
e
nt
e
r
e
da
r
ou
nd“
pr
i
nc
ip
l
e
”(
li 理) that ZHU Xi had constructed. East Asian
Confucians in recent ages used renewed interpretation of such ancient
Confucian classics as the Four Books to criticize Song learning. They all stood
in their historical contexts to contemplate and criticize the doctrines of ZHU
Xi
.Thu
st
hee
l
u
c
i
da
t
i
onoft
hei
nt
e
r
pr
e
t
e
r
’
sc
ont
e
x
t
u
a
l
i
t
yi
st
r
u
l
ya
ni
mportant method in studying the history of East Asian Confucian hermeneutics.
Ipr
opos
et
oc
ombi
net
he
s
et
wome
t
h
ods
,“
h
i
s
t
or
yofi
d
e
a
s
”a
nd“
i
nt
e
l
l
e
c
t
u
a
lh
i
s
t
or
y
,
”a
sa
ppr
opr
i
a
t
ea
ppr
oa
c
he
st
ot
hes
t
u
dyofEa
s
tAs
i
a
n
Confuc
i
a
nhe
r
me
ne
u
t
i
c
s
.Thef
or
me
rf
oc
u
s
e
so
nt
he“
l
i
ng
u
i
s
t
i
c
a
l
i
t
y
”of
248
Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy
________________________________________________________________
interpretation of the classics, paying special attention to the fact that the
interpreters dwell in a linguistic world created by the classics, and decode the
classics as a member of their linguistic world (see Gadamer). The latter foc
u
s
e
sont
he“
hi
s
t
or
i
c
a
l
i
t
y
”oft
hei
nt
e
r
pr
e
t
e
r
,
k
e
e
pi
ngi
t
s eye on the fact that
the interpreter is a concrete individual subject to the complex interplay of
hi
s
t
o
r
i
c
a
l
c
ond
i
t
i
ons
,
a
ndt
ha
tar
e
l
a
t
i
ons
hi
pof“
i
nt
e
r
-s
u
bj
e
c
t
i
v
i
t
y
”i
sf
or
me
d
between the interpreter and the classics. Confucian interpretation of the
cl
a
s
s
i
c
si
sonei
nwhi
c
hbot
h“
Ia
nnot
a
t
et
hes
i
xc
l
a
s
s
i
c
s
”(
wo zhu liu jing 我註
六經) a
nd“
t
hes
i
xc
l
a
s
s
i
c
sa
n
not
a
t
eme
”(
liu jing zhu wo 六經註我), and thus the
historicality of the interpreter occupies a crucial position (see Huang 1999a).
IV. Possible Directions
The history of East Asian Confucianism is full of vast waves and billowing
tides of thought: among the various sects there has no doubt been much
mutual contention, but reciprocal influence has also resulted from such
confrontational exchanges, forming complex new trends of thought. Thus
possible directions for study of the Confucian hermeneutics in East Asia are
as varied as the trees in the forest, and cannot all be lumped into a single
corner. I will try to propose three directions for research in this field from the
angle of the regions involved.
1. Chinese Confucianism as the Main Axis. The development of
Confucianism in Tokugawa Japan and Chôson Korea is intimately related to
Chinese Confucianism, and thus study of the Confucian hermeneutics of the
classics in East Asia must utilize the interpretations of classics by Chinese
Confucians as an important referential point. From this standpoint, we can
first explore the ancient origins of Chinese Confucian hermeneutics and the
formation of the Confucian classics in the pre-Qin 秦 period, as well as the
commentaries on them of the Han 漢 and Tang 唐 dynasties, taking our cue
f
r
om ZHUXi
’
s(
1
1
3
0
-1
2
0
0
)d
i
c
t
u
mt
ha
t“
ne
i
t
he
rt
hec
ommentaries of the
Han nor the sub-c
omme
nt
a
r
i
e
soft
heTa
ngc
a
nbef
or
s
a
k
e
n”
;ne
x
t
, we can
study East Asian Confucian interpretations of the Lunyu and Yijing《易經》
(Book of Change). ZHU Xi was an epoch-making figure in the history of
Confucianism, as his promotion of the Four Books over the Five Classics determined a new course for the East Asian Confucians of recent ages. QIAN
Mu 錢穆 (Binsi 賓四, 1895-1900) put the matter well when he said that ZHU
Xi was the number-one person in the history of Chinese Confucianism after
Confucius himself (Qian: 1.2). Last, Chinese Confucianism has distant origins and a long course of development, but within it the Chunqiu《春秋》
(Springs and Autumns) is the classic most closely connected with practical
applications, as Han Confucians used it to judge court cases. Within the
249
Huang: East Asian Confucianism
________________________________________________________________
Confucianism of Taiwan in its Japanese occupation (1895-1945), the spirit of
the Chunqiu a
l
s
of
u
l
f
i
l
l
e
di
t
sf
u
nc
t
i
oni
nf
or
t
i
f
y
i
ngt
heba
r
r
i
e
rbe
t
we
e
n“
ba
rba
r
i
a
n”a
ndChi
ne
s
e
.Thema
ni
f
e
s
t
a
t
i
onoft
hes
pi
r
i
to
ft
heChunqiu in colonial Taiwan awaits deeper investigation.
2. The Confucianism of Tokugawa Japan. China and Japan are in close
geographic proximity to each other. Thus the cultural, political, and economic relationships between China and Japan have been intimate since antiquity. In medieval times the importation of Tang culture once incited Japa
n
’
sTa
i
k
aRe
f
o
r
ma
t
i
on,a
ndi
nt
heTok
u
g
a
wae
r
aJ
a
pa
nwou
l
da
bsorb
Chi
ne
s
ec
u
l
t
u
r
eona
ne
v
e
nbr
oa
de
rs
c
a
l
e
.Be
c
a
u
s
eo
fJ
a
pa
n
’
si
n
v
a
s
i
onof
China, however, there has been tension in the relationship between the two
countries over the past hundred years. After entering the twentieth century,
there have been a great many Chinese students studying abroad in Japan, and
in 1928, DAI Chuanxian 戴傳賢 (Jitao 季陶, 1891-1949) published his Essay on
Japan (Riben Lun《日本論》), which even more strenuously called for an increased study of Japan. However, the number of scholarly works related to
Japan in twentieth-century China, as compared with the numerous studies
related to China in Japan, is truly a source of vexation. Scholarly works on
Japanese Confucianism are even fewer in number. Over the past twenty years
or so, under the impetus of the Japan Foundation, research works on Japan
from the Sinological communities of Europe and the United States have
appeared like bamboo-shoots after the spring rains; whether in terms of
quality or quantity, those from the Chinese academic community cannot
compare. In the past ten years, scholars from both sides of the Taiwan Straits
have become interested in the study of Japanese Confucianism, but gauging
from the works already published, it appears that most are overviews, with
monographs being relatively few. If we can engage in the in-depth study of
certain topics within the history of interpretation of classics by Japanese
Confucians over the past four hundred years, it should prove to be of definite
significance and value.
Given these considerations, research topics in this new field could
include such figur
e
sa
sI
TŌ J
i
ns
a
iofJ
a
pa
n
’
sa
nc
i
e
nt
-learning school, the
interpretations of such classics as the Lunyu《論語》, Daxue 《大學》 (Great
Learning), Zhongyong《中庸》
, and Shijing《詩經》by other Tokugawa Confucians,
and their comparison with the interpretations of the same classics by Chinese
Confucians. A new field of vision could thereby be opened. Aside from these,
we could also study the interpretations of Chinese ritual (li 禮) by Japanese
Confucians of the Tokugawa period.
3. Korean Confucianism of the Chôson Dynasty. Within Korean
Confucianism, as the Daxue occupies a genuinely pivotal position in the East
Asian Confucianism of recent ages, we can adopt the perspective of comparative intellectual history to explore the similarities and differences be-
250
Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy
________________________________________________________________
tween Chinese and Korean interpretations of the Daxue.Ne
x
t
,Me
nc
i
u
s
’
“
f
ou
rg
e
rminal heart-mi
nds
”(
si duan zhi xin 四端之心) was a subject of some
contention between the Song Confucians ZHU Xi and the Huxiang 湖湘
scholars. On the basis of his ethical structure of the bifurcation between
affections (qing 情) and principle (li 理), ZHU Xi criticized YANG Shi 楊時
(Guishan 龜山 , 1053-1135), XIE Liangzuo 謝 良 佐 (1050-1103), and the
Hu
x
i
a
ngs
c
hol
a
r
s
’i
nt
e
r
pr
e
t
a
t
i
onof“
hu
ma
ni
t
y
”(
ren 仁 ). Confronting the
s
a
mes
or
tofi
s
s
u
e
,t
heChôs
onConf
u
c
i
a
nYIT’
oe
g
y
e李退溪 (1501-1570)
pr
opos
e
dt
he“
di
s
t
i
nc
t
i
onbe
t
we
e
nt
hef
ou
ro
r
i
g
i
nsa
nds
e
v
e
na
f
f
e
c
t
i
ons
,
”
c
a
t
e
g
or
i
z
i
ngt
he“
f
ou
ror
i
g
i
ns
”a
nd“
s
e
v
e
na
f
f
e
c
t
i
ons
”s
e
pa
r
a
t
e
l
ya
s“
pr
i
nc
ipl
e
”a
nd“
ma
t
e
r
i
a
l
f
or
c
e
”(
qi 氣). KI Taesong 奇高峰 (1527-1572), also on the
ba
s
i
so
fZHU Xi
’
spe
r
s
pe
c
t
i
v
e
,r
e
pe
a
t
e
d
l
ye
ng
a
g
e
di
nd
e
ba
t
ewi
t
hYi
,oppos
i
nghi
sv
i
e
woft
he“
f
ou
ror
i
g
i
ns
”a
n
d“
s
e
v
e
na
f
f
e
c
t
i
ons
”a
st
hi
ng
sof
separate substances. Subsequently, YI Yulgok 李栗谷 (1536-1584) would
c
ont
i
nu
et
oe
l
a
bor
a
t
eu
ponKITa
e
s
ong
’
spos
i
t
i
on,
c
r
i
t
i
c
i
z
i
ngYi
’
s“
d
i
stinction
between the four origins and seven affect
i
ons
”(
s
e
eChu
ng
)
.
Following the above directions, we will perhaps be able to develop
some regional Confucian content of significance to East Asian thought and
culture more generally. Mention was made above of the anti-Zhu tide in East
Asian thought from the seventeenth century onward; in terms of the content
of this trend, most of those East Asian scholars opposed to Zhu in recent
ages have utilized the path of commentary on the classics to arrive at such
oppos
i
t
i
ona
lg
oa
l
s
.Thi
st
i
deofoppos
i
t
i
ont
oZhu
’
sdoc
t
r
i
ne
snoton
l
ye
nveloped the vast spatial territories of China, Japan, and Korea, but also the
time-span of the seventeenth, eighteenth, and nineteenth centuries. The
g
e
ne
r
a
ls
i
g
ni
f
i
c
a
nc
eoft
hi
st
i
deofoppos
i
t
i
ont
oZhu
’
sdoc
t
r
i
ne
sl
i
e
si
nr
evealing how in each region it has possessed different intellectual-historical
significance as these three nations of China, Japan, and Korea have made the
ma
r
c
hf
o
r
wa
r
df
r
om t
r
a
d
i
t
i
ont
omode
r
ni
t
y
.I
nJ
a
pa
n
,t
h
ec
ol
l
a
ps
eofZhu
’
s
mode of thinking can be seen as the track of intellectual development from
2b
“
na
t
u
r
a
l
”t
o“
ma
n
-ma
d
e
;
”
u
ti
nChi
na
,ZHU Xi
’
sdoc
t
r
i
ne
sr
e
c
e
i
v
e
dt
he
c
r
i
t
i
c
i
s
mf
r
omDAIZhe
n,
a
ndt
he“
mode
rni
t
y
”wa
sr
e
v
e
a
l
e
di
ns
u
c
ha
s
pe
c
t
s
a
sDa
i
’
sc
a
s
t
i
nga
s
i
det
heS
ongne
o-Confucian dualism of principle and material force. He pr
opos
e
dt
ha
tt
he“
na
t
u
r
a
l
”(
ziran 自然)i
ss
i
mp
l
yt
he“
i
ne
v
it
a
bl
e
”(
biran 必然)
;
t
ha
t“
pr
i
nc
i
pl
ei
st
hel
a
c
kofi
mba
l
a
nc
ei
nt
hea
f
f
e
c
t
i
ons
;
”
a
ndt
ha
t“
p
r
i
nc
i
pl
ee
x
i
s
t
si
nde
s
i
r
e
s
.
”
Aside from looking at the regional differences of each East Asian
Thi
si
sMARUYAMA Ma
s
a
o’
s丸山真男 view. Maruyama believes that Tokugawa-period
intellect
u
a
l
hi
s
t
or
yf
ol
l
o
ws“
S
ongConf
u
c
i
a
ni
s
m.
”Hepoi
nt
sou
tt
ha
tt
her
i
s
eofOg
y
uS
or
a
i
’
s
doc
t
r
i
ne
sc
a
u
s
e
dt
hec
ol
l
a
ps
eofZhu
’
smodeoft
hi
nk
i
ng
,
whi
c
hha
ds
e
r
v
e
da
st
hei
de
ological
ba
s
i
sf
orTok
u
g
a
wa
’
sfeudal system. See Maruyama 1974.
2
251
Huang: East Asian Confucianism
________________________________________________________________
country, we can also concentrate our focus upon such important topics in the
Confucian classics as the following: (a) what is the priority between knowledge and moral conduct, and why? (b) what sort of relationship pertains
be
t
we
e
nt
he“
mi
nd
”(
xin)a
nd“
pr
i
nc
i
pl
e
”(
li)? (c) what is the relationship
between natural order and cultural order? Focusing on key passages from the
classics, we can then analyze the changes these passages undergo in the interpretations given them by Confucians from China, Japan, and Korea. Let
me give three examples to illustrate.
1. The phrase Confucius used to describe his own spiritual pilgrimage,
“
a
tf
i
f
t
y
,Ik
ne
wHe
a
v
e
n
’
sc
omma
nd”(
Lunyu 2.4), has been given a plethora
of explanations by Confucian scholars from China, Japan, and Korea over
the past two thousand years, with no consensus among them. Both HE Yan
何 晏 (?–
249) and HUANG Kan 皇 侃 explained tianming 天命 (
He
a
v
e
n
’
s
c
omma
nd)
i
nt
hes
e
n
s
eof“
a
l
l
ot
t
e
df
or
t
u
ne
”(
luming 祿命). ZHU Xi, however,
explained tianming a
s“
s
i
mpl
yt
heope
r
a
t
i
onsofHe
a
v
e
n
’
sdao as endowed in
things, or the reasons by which affairs should bea
st
he
ya
r
e
,
”c
omi
ngc
l
o
s
et
o
e
x
pl
a
i
n
i
ngi
ta
s“
p
r
i
nc
i
pl
e
”(
li 理 ). LIU Baonan 劉 寶 楠 (Chuzhen 楚 楨
1791-1855) interpreted the phrase as follows:
“
Kno
wi
ngHe
a
v
e
n
’
sc
omma
nd”i
st
ok
no
wt
ha
t
one
’
ss
e
l
fi
sa
ppoi
nt
e
db
yHe
a
v
e
n,
that one is not born for nothing. We might say that Confucius lived through the
decline of the Zhou, at a time when sages and worthies had long since failed to
appear. When he reached fifty, he was able to study the Yi (Book of Changes), and
knowing that he had gained something from this, he made the modest claim for
hi
ms
e
l
ft
ha
thewa
s“
wi
t
hou
tg
r
e
a
te
r
r
or
,
”me
a
ni
ngt
ha
theu
nde
r
s
t
oodwh
y
Heaven had given him life and with what it commanded him, and that he had not
failed to live up to Heaven, and thus he appointed himself the task of realizing
He
a
v
e
n
’
sc
omma
nd.Ming 命 (command) is what one establishes in oneself and
receives from Heaven, and thus something the sage dares not decline. On another
day, during the troubles with Huan Tui 桓魋,Conf
u
c
i
u
ss
a
i
dt
ha
t“
He
a
v
e
ne
ndo
we
dmewi
t
hv
i
r
t
u
e
;
”wha
t
He
a
v
e
ne
ndo
we
dhi
mwi
t
hwa
sHe
a
v
e
n
’
sc
omma
nd.
Onl
ybe
c
a
u
s
ehek
ne
wHe
a
v
e
n
’
sc
omma
nddi
dhef
u
r
t
he
rs
a
yt
ha
t“
i
snotHe
a
v
e
n
t
heonet
ha
tk
no
wsme
?
!
”c
l
a
r
i
f
y
i
ngt
hef
a
c
tt
ha
tHe
a
v
e
n
’
smi
ndwa
sa
bl
et
o
communicate with his own. (Liu: 2.44-45)
He thus emphasized the unity between mankind and Heaven, in what counts
as an exceptionally good explanation. XU Fuguan 徐復觀 (1902-1982) explained this passage as follows:
Conf
u
c
i
u
s
’“
k
no
wi
ngHe
a
v
e
n
’
sc
omma
nd
”i
si
de
nt
i
c
a
lwi
t
hMe
n
c
i
u
s
’“
k
no
wi
ng
one
’
sna
t
u
r
e
”(
zhixing 知性)
,a
nd“
k
no
wi
ngone
’
sna
t
u
r
e
”i
st
hes
a
mea
s“
e
xha
u
s
t
i
ngone
’
smi
nd”(
jin xin 盡心). Thus, to put it even mor
edi
r
e
c
t
l
y
,
Conf
u
c
i
u
s
’
“
k
no
wi
ngHe
a
v
e
n
’
sc
omma
nd”wa
st
hee
x
pr
e
s
s
i
onoft
hee
nt
i
r
es
u
bs
t
a
nc
ea
nd
g
r
e
a
tf
u
nc
t
i
onofhi
sbe
i
ng“
r
oot
e
di
nt
hehe
a
r
t
/mi
nd”(
benxin 本心), and he is
thus by no means a mystic. (Xu 1982: 388)
252
Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy
________________________________________________________________
Among Japanese Confucians, too, this same saying has undergone a
variety of different interpretations. If we take this saying as our main axis,
and explore the interpretations given it by Chinese Confucians throughout
t
hea
g
e
sa
swe
l
la
sbys
u
c
hJ
a
pa
ne
s
eConf
u
c
i
a
nsa
sI
TŌ J
i
ns
a
i
,
OGYUS
or
a
i
荻生徂徠, and NAKAI Riken, we can then analyze the intellectual-historical
implications revealed to us through discrepancies in the interpretation of
Conf
u
c
i
u
s
’t
hou
g
htbyChi
ne
s
ea
ndJ
a
pa
ne
s
eCon
f
u
c
i
a
ns
.I
no
r
d
e
rt
oe
l
u
c
idate the intellectual-historical implications of these interpretations by Chine
s
ea
ndJ
a
pa
ne
s
eConf
u
c
i
a
nsof“
a
tf
i
f
t
yIk
ne
wHe
a
v
e
n
’
sc
omma
nd,
”we
could engage in a focused analysis of the contextuality of Chinese and
Japanese Confucian history. This so-c
a
l
l
e
d“
c
ont
e
x
t
u
a
l
i
t
y
”i
ncorporates two
meanings. The first is how individual Chinese and Japanese Confucians interpret this saying within the overall context of their thought—this level of
“
c
ont
e
x
t
u
a
l
i
t
y
”i
n
v
ol
v
e
st
hes
o-c
a
l
l
e
d“
he
r
me
ne
ut
i
cc
i
r
c
l
e
.
”Thes
e
c
ondi
si
n
what manner the interpretations of individual Confucians become connected
with the overall context of Confucian history in China and Japan.
2
.Co
nf
u
c
i
u
sa
l
s
os
a
i
d
,“
Toov
e
r
c
omeone
’
ss
e
l
fa
ndr
e
s
t
or
er
i
t
u
a
li
s
huma
n
i
t
y
.I
fonec
a
noneda
yo
v
e
r
c
omeone
’
ss
e
l
fa
ndr
e
s
t
or
er
i
t
u
a
l
,t
he
world will return home (to) humanity therein. To act with humanity comes
from the self—ho
wc
ou
l
di
tc
omef
r
om ot
he
r
s
?
!
”(
Lunyu 12.1). This statement is a most crucial one in the history of Confucian hermeneutics in East
Asia; the turns and transformations in interpretations of this passage by
Chinese Confucians since the fourth century AD can provide much information about the fundamental revolutions in Chinese intellectual history. In
r
e
s
pond
i
ngt
oYANYu
a
n
’
s顏淵 q
u
e
s
t
i
ona
bou
t“
hu
ma
ni
t
y
”(
ren 仁), Confucius’t
wophr
a
s
e
sof“
t
oov
e
r
c
omeone
’
ss
e
l
fa
ndr
e
s
t
or
er
i
t
u
a
l
”(
ke ji fu li 克
己復禮) a
nd“
t
oa
c
twi
t
hh
u
ma
ni
t
yc
ome
sf
r
om t
hes
e
l
f
”(
wei ren you ji 為仁由
己) hint, in a succinct and terse manner, at the complex relationship between
“
huma
n
i
t
y
”a
nd“
r
i
t
u
a
l
”(
li 禮). In his Collected Annotations, ZHU Xi states:
“
Hu
ma
ni
t
y
”i
st
hec
ompl
e
t
e
dv
i
r
t
u
eofone
’
sor
i
g
i
na
lmi
nd.Ke 克 means to
“
o
v
e
r
c
ome
”(
sheng 勝); ji 己 (
s
e
l
f
)r
e
f
e
r
st
oone
’
so
wns
e
l
f
i
s
hde
s
i
r
e
s
;a
ndfu 復
me
a
nst
o“
r
e
t
u
r
nt
o”(
fan 反). Li 禮 (ritual) refers to the regular patterns of
Heavenly principle, and wei ren 為仁 (acting with humanity) refers to that by which
one compl
e
t
e
st
hev
i
r
t
u
eofone
’
smi
nd.
I
nt
hec
ompl
e
t
e
dv
i
r
t
u
eofone
’
smi
nd,
there is nothing that is not Heavenly principle, and yet it cannot be [allowed to be]
destroyed by human desires. Thus those who would act with humanity must have
a means by which to overcome selfish desires and return to ritual, so that all affairs
a
r
e[
i
na
c
c
or
dwi
t
h]He
a
v
e
nl
ypr
i
nc
i
pl
e
,a
ndt
hev
i
r
t
u
eofone
’
sor
i
g
i
na
lmi
nd
returns to completeness within the self. (Zhu 1994:182)
The Collected Sayings of Master Zhu 《朱子語類》 s
a
i
dmu
c
ht
hes
a
met
hi
ng
:“
t
o
overcome and rid oneself of selfishness, and return to Heavenly principle, is
noneot
he
rt
ha
nhu
ma
n
i
t
y
”(
Zhu1
9
8
6
:4
1
)
.I
nb
ot
hp
l
a
c
e
s
,t
he“
pu
bl
i
c
ne
s
s
253
Huang: East Asian Confucianism
________________________________________________________________
ofHe
a
v
e
nl
ypr
i
nc
i
pl
e
”i
sc
ont
r
a
s
t
e
dwi
t
ht
he“
s
e
l
f
i
s
hne
s
sofhu
ma
nde
s
i
r
e
s
,
”
emphasizing that the former must be victorious over the latter—this is the
basis upon which ZHU Xi interpreted ke as sheng (overcome). The phrase
“
t
hebe
g
i
nni
ng
s(
duan 端) o
fov
e
r
c
omi
ngt
hes
e
l
fa
ndr
e
t
u
r
ni
ngt
or
i
t
u
a
l
”
f
r
omZHUXi
’
sc
omme
nt
a
r
yon the Mencius (1B) probably refers to this work
of“
ov
e
r
c
omi
nga
ndr
i
dd
i
ngone
s
e
l
fo
fs
e
l
f
i
s
hne
s
sa
ndr
e
t
u
r
ni
ngt
oHe
a
v
e
nl
y
princ
i
p
l
e
.
”Af
t
e
rZHU Xii
nt
e
r
pr
e
t
e
d“
keji”a
sg
e
t
t
i
ngr
i
dof“
one
’
so
wn
s
e
l
f
i
s
hde
s
i
r
e
s
,
”i
twou
l
dc
omet
oi
nc
i
t
et
hec
r
i
t
i
c
i
s
m ofMing and Qing dynasty Confucians. For example, the late Ming disciples of WANG Yangming,
ZOU Shouyi 鄒守益 (1491-1562), WANG Longxi 王龍溪, and LUO Jinxi 羅
近溪, and the early-Qing scholars YAN Yuan 顏元 (Xizhai 習齋, 1635-1704),
LI Gong 李塨 (Shugu 恕谷, 1659-1733), and DAI Zhen 戴震 (Tongyuan 東原,
1723-1
7
7
7
)
,a
l
lha
ds
e
v
e
r
ec
r
i
t
i
c
i
s
msofZHUXi
’
si
nt
e
r
pr
e
t
a
t
i
o
n.
DAIZhe
n
f
u
r
t
he
rd
i
v
i
de
du
pt
he“
s
e
l
f
i
s
hde
s
i
r
e
s
”(
siyu 私欲)ofZhu
’
sc
omme
nt
a
r
y
,
e
x
pl
a
i
n
i
ng“
s
e
l
f
i
s
h”a
nd“
des
i
r
e
s
”s
e
pa
r
a
t
e
l
y
,hol
d
i
ngt
ha
twh
i
l
et
hef
or
me
r
should indeed be gotten rid of, the latter cannot. The Song neo-Confucian
phi
l
os
oph
yof“
pr
e
s
e
r
v
i
ngHe
a
v
e
nl
ypr
i
nc
i
pl
ea
ndd
i
s
c
a
r
d
i
nghu
ma
nde
s
i
r
e
s
”
r
e
a
c
he
dag
r
e
a
tt
u
r
ni
ngpoi
ntwi
t
hDAIZhe
n,a
nd“
d
e
s
i
r
e
s
”c
a
met
ot
he
f
or
e
f
r
ont
.Thec
ha
ng
i
ngi
nt
e
r
pr
e
t
a
t
i
onsof“
ke ji fu li”c
onc
r
e
t
e
l
ya
nds
u
bt
l
y
reveal the twists and turns of Ming and Qing intellectual history (see
Mizoguchi 1980: 283-331).
3
.Thepa
s
s
a
g
e“
He
a
v
e
n
’
sc
omma
ndi
swha
ti
sme
a
ntbyna
t
u
r
e
;t
o
f
ol
l
o
wone
’
sna
t
u
r
ei
swha
ti
sme
a
ntb
ydao (way); to cultivate dao is what is
me
a
ntb
yt
e
a
c
hi
ng
,
”f
r
omwha
tZHUXi
de
t
e
r
mi
ne
dt
obet
hef
i
r
s
tc
ha
pt
e
rof
the Zhongyong 《中庸》, is of most crucial importance in the history of East
Asian Confucianism. Modern-da
yConf
u
c
i
a
ns
c
hol
a
rTANG J
u
ny
i
’
s唐君毅
(1908-1978) works on the reconstruction of Chinese philosophy were collected together under the title Zhongguo Zhexue Yuanlun 《中國哲學原論》
(Discourse on the Sources of Chinese Philosophy) (see Tang 1966-75), which is
further divided into Dao Lun Pian 《導論篇》 (Introduction), Yuan Xing Pian 《原
性篇》 (Tracing the Source of Human Nature), Yuan Dao Pian 《原道篇》 (Tracing the
Source of Dao), and Yuan Jiao Pian 《原教篇》 (Tracing the Source of Teaching), all
deriving their meanings from this Zhongyong passage. Yuan Dao Pian describes
the development of metaphysics, emphasizing mank
i
nd’
su
l
t
i
ma
t
er
e
a
l
i
z
a
t
i
on
and the dao upon which the human cultural world is based; Yuan Xing Pian
describes the development of discourse on human nature; and Yuan Jiao Pian
discusses the development of Song-Ming neo-Confucianism. Information
about the philosophical positions and trends of East Asian Confucians over
the past thousand years can often be gleaned from their interpretations of the
three terms xing 性 ([human] nature), dao 道 (way, course), and jiao 教 (teaching)
from the Zhongyong.
In his Chapter by Chapter and Sentence by Sentence Commentary on the Zhongyong
254
Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy
________________________________________________________________
《中庸章句》, ZHU
Xi interpreted this passage as follows:
Ming 命 is like ling 令 (command); xing 性 (nature) is simply principle (li 理).
Through yin and yang and the five phases, Heaven transforms and gives birth to
the myriad things, which take their forms through material force (qi 氣), yet with
principle also endowed therein, as if ordained through command. At this the life
of each person and thing, on the basis of the principle with which each is endowed, takes on virtues of healthy compliance to the five constancies—this is
what is referred to as nature (xing). Shuai 率 means xun 循 (to follow); dao 道 is like
lu 路 (road; course). If each person or thing follows the natural inclinations of its
nature, then there will be none that in its daily functioning among things does not
have its own course to follow, and this is what is meant by dao. (Zhu 1983a: 17)
ZHU Xie
x
pl
a
i
ne
d“
na
t
u
r
e
”a
s“
pr
i
nc
i
pl
e
”
:a
bov
et
hepr
a
c
t
i
c
a
lwor
l
dof
human relations, daily needs, food, drink, and relations between the sexes, a
s
e
pa
r
a
t
e
,t
r
a
ns
c
e
nd
e
ntr
e
a
l
m dr
i
v
e
nby“
pr
i
nc
i
pl
e
”i
spos
i
t
e
d
.Thi
st
r
a
nscendent world had a profound and far-reaching influence upon the East
Asian world of thought from the thirteenth century onwards. CHEN Chun
陳淳 (Beixi 北溪, 1159-1
2
2
3
)l
a
i
df
or
t
hZHUXi
’
sd
octrine as follows:
The character ming 命 carries two senses: one refers to principle, and one refers to
material force—but in fact principle does not exist outside of material force. We
might say that the two material forces, which have been circulating since time
immemorial, creating and recreating life without cease, are not simply empty
material forces, but must have that which oversees their operations—what we call
“
pr
i
nc
i
pl
e
.
”Pr
i
nc
i
pl
es
e
r
v
e
sa
st
hepi
v
otbetween them, and thus great transformation circulates, and the recreation of life never comes to a halt. When we
speak of ming referring to principle, this does not mean it is separate from material
force, but simply that on top of material force we pointou
ta“
pr
i
nc
i
pl
e
”t
ha
ti
s
not
mi
x
e
du
pwi
t
hi
t
.
Fore
x
a
mpl
e
,
i
ns
u
c
hphr
a
s
e
sa
s“
He
a
v
e
n
’
sc
o
mma
ndi
swha
t
i
sme
a
ntby‘
na
t
u
r
e
,
’
”“
Atf
i
f
t
yIk
ne
wHe
a
v
e
n
’
sc
omma
nd,
”a
nd“
Ex
ha
u
s
tt
he
l
i
mi
t
sofpr
i
nc
i
pl
ea
ndna
t
u
r
ea
nda
r
r
i
v
ea
tone
’
sc
omma
nd,
”t
hec
ha
r
a
c
t
er ming in
each case refers solely to principle, that which in the circul
a
t
i
onofHe
a
v
e
n
’
s
c
omma
nda
ndHe
a
v
e
n
’
sdao is endowed into things. When in terms of the principles of origination (yuan 元), penetration (heng 亨), benefit (li 利), and perseverance (zhen 貞)
,
i
tr
e
f
e
r
st
o“
He
a
v
e
n
’
sdao;
”whe
ni
nt
e
r
msoft
hec
i
r
c
u
l
a
t
i
onof
dao as endo
we
di
nt
ot
hi
ng
s
,
i
tr
e
f
e
r
st
o“
He
a
v
e
n
’
sc
omma
nd.
”(
C.
Che
n:
1
4
)
Che
nhe
r
et
ook“
pr
i
nc
i
p
l
e
”a
st
hepi
v
ott
ha
tholds control over the myriad
t
hi
ng
s
,
a
ndr
e
f
e
r
r
e
dt
o“
t
ha
twh
i
c
hc
i
r
c
u
l
a
t
e
sa
n
di
se
ndo
we
di
nt
ot
hemy
r
i
a
d
t
hi
ng
s
”a
s“
He
a
v
e
n
’
sc
omma
nd.
”Che
na
ndt
hephi
l
os
oph
yof“
pr
i
nc
i
pl
e
”
that he received from ZHU Xi were later subject to the criticism of East
Asian Confucians of various nations from the sixteenth century onward.
I
TŌJ
i
ns
a
i
,
f
ore
x
a
mpl
e
,
pu
tf
or
t
ha
na
r
g
u
me
nta
g
a
i
ns
tChe
n:
Thes
a
g
es
pok
eofbot
h“
He
a
v
e
n
’
sdao”a
nd“
He
a
v
e
n
’
sc
omma
nd”
—what is referred to is different in each case. Students should comprehend the original
255
Huang: East Asian Confucianism
________________________________________________________________
pu
r
po
r
t
oft
hes
a
g
e
’
su
t
t
e
rances on the basis of what is said in each case. We might
s
a
yt
ha
t“
He
a
v
e
n
’
sdao”r
e
f
e
r
st
ot
hec
e
a
s
e
l
e
s
sc
omi
ng
sa
ndg
oi
ng
sofyin and yang,
a
nd“
He
a
v
e
n
’
sming”r
e
f
e
r
st
ot
hef
or
t
u
ne
sa
ndmi
s
f
o
r
t
u
ne
st
ha
ta
rrive without
being beckoned—the principles involved are clearly different. The Song Confucians did not examine this and muddled them together, an especially great [oversight] concerning the classic of a sage. In his Ziyi Xiangjiang 《字義詳講》, CHEN
Be
i
x
is
a
i
d,
“
t
hec
ha
r
a
c
t
e
rming carries two senses, one referring to principle, and
one referr
i
ngt
oma
t
e
r
i
a
l
f
or
c
e
.
”Thi
se
x
pl
a
na
t
i
onc
ome
sf
r
omZHUXi
,
a
ndi
t
wa
s
g
r
e
a
t
l
yf
a
br
i
c
a
t
e
d.Lo
ok
i
nga
twha
thec
a
l
l
e
dt
hec
omma
ndof“
pr
i
nc
i
pl
e
,
”i
ti
s
wha
tt
hes
a
g
er
e
f
e
r
r
e
dt
oa
s“
He
a
v
e
n
’
sdao,
”whe
r
e
a
swha
tt
hes
a
g
er
e
f
e
r
r
e
dt
oa
s
“
He
a
v
e
n
’
sc
omma
nd”i
sme
r
e
l
yr
e
l
e
g
a
t
e
dt
ot
hec
omma
ndof“
ma
t
e
r
i
a
lf
or
c
e
.
”
Thu
s“
He
a
v
e
n
’
sdao”a
n
d“
He
a
v
e
n
’
sc
omma
nd”we
r
emu
ddl
e
dt
og
e
t
he
r
,
a
ndwha
t
the sage referred to as“
c
omma
nd”be
c
a
meaone
-sided aspect of command—is
t
hi
sa
c
c
e
pt
a
bl
e
?S
i
nc
et
hes
a
g
es
pok
eofbot
h“
He
a
v
e
n
’
sdao”a
nd“
He
a
v
e
n
’
s
comma
nd,
”wec
a
ns
e
et
ha
t
t
he
r
ei
sadi
s
t
i
nc
t
i
onbe
t
we
e
nt
het
wo
.
Be
i
x
i
s
t
a
t
e
dt
ha
t
t
he
r
ei
st
hec
omma
ndof“
pr
i
nc
i
pl
e
”a
ndt
hec
omma
ndof“
ma
t
e
r
i
a
l
f
or
c
e
,
”a
nd
that there are further two types of comma
ndsof“
ma
t
e
r
i
a
l
f
or
c
e
.
”Al
a
s
!Cou
l
d
the words of the sage be so fragmented and manifold that they would cause
pe
opl
es
u
c
hd
i
f
f
i
c
u
l
t
yi
nu
nde
r
s
t
a
ndi
ngt
he
m?(
I
t
ō1
9
7
1
:
1
2
0
)
I
TŌJ
i
ns
a
i
r
e
bu
k
e
dChe
na
ndhi
sd
oc
t
r
i
nema
i
nl
ybe
c
a
u
s
eI
t
ōu
nde
r
s
t
ood the
dao i
nt
hec
l
a
s
s
i
c
sofConf
u
c
i
u
sa
ndMe
nc
i
u
sa
s“
t
hep
a
t
ha
ppr
opriate for
people to walk in their daily functions of human relat
i
ons
”(
i
b
i
d
.
:1
9
)
,a
nd
thereby deconstructed the metaphysicalwor
l
dbu
i
l
tu
pon“
pr
i
nc
i
pl
e
”e
s
t
a
bl
i
s
he
db
yZHU Xia
ndot
he
rS
ongConf
u
c
i
a
ns
.I
TŌ J
i
ns
a
ic
l
e
a
r
l
yde
c
l
a
r
e
d
t
ha
t
“
t
he
r
ei
snodao outside of mankind, and no mankind outside of dao”(
I
t
ō
1988: 205), and advocated returning home to the original classics of Confucius and Mencius, aspiring to resolve interpretive issues in the classics
through the method of critical philology. His book anticipated eighteenth-century scholar DAI Dongyuan by about a hundred years, raising the
first call for the return-to-the-classics movement of East Asian Confucians in
recent ages. At the same time, this movement also manifested a severe criticism of Song neo-Confucianism, concentrating its attentions on the refutat
i
o
noft
het
r
a
ns
c
e
nd
e
nt“
p
r
i
nc
i
pl
e
”pos
i
t
e
dbyt
hel
a
t
t
e
r
,a
nde
mphasizing
t
hepos
i
t
i
ont
ha
t“
He
a
v
e
nl
ypr
i
nc
i
pl
e
s
”(
tian li 天理) must be sought for in
human affairs. All such new trends demonstrate the important position that
I
TŌ J
i
n
s
a
ioccupied in the history of East Asian Confucianism (see Huang
1
9
9
9
b)
.Thee
r
a
sofI
TŌJinsai and CHEN Beixi were separated by nearly
400 years, and each believed that he was returning to the classics to interpret
the original intent of Confucius and Mencius, and yet the disparity in philosophical implications between them is very great—this matter constitutes a
major topic in comparative East-Asian intellectual hist
or
y
.
I
TŌ J
i
ns
a
i
,
i
nh
i
s
Ch
ū
y
ōHa
kki
《中庸發揮》, gave further elucidation of such statements as
“
He
a
v
e
n
’
sc
omma
ndi
swha
ti
sme
a
ntby‘
na
t
u
r
e
,
’
”r
evealing much about his
philosophical position.
256
Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy
________________________________________________________________
I have taken the first passage of the Zhongyong as an example mainly in
order to explain how important passages from the Confucian classics often
fulfill a barometer-like indicatory function in the history of Confucian hermeneutics in East Asia: the philosophical position, political beliefs, and intellectual tendencies of interpreters can often be glimpsed through their
interpretive discussions of certain passages from the classics. Such passages
are of course too numerous to mention.
Confucian classics are truly the locus classici of East-Asian intellectual
history: the various philosophical issues implicit in the Lunyu, Mencius, and
other classics garner different interpretations among the Confucians of
various nations in East Asia, and if we can focus on key passages from the
Confucian classics and analyze changes in their interpretation in history, we
can certainly get a glimpse at the crux of East-Asian Confucian hermeneutics.
V. Conclusion
There are two currents of particular prominence in world history in the
second half of the twentieth century. One is that the globalization and
transnationalization that have come on the heels of developments in science
and high technology have gradually removed the barriers between people
from nation to nation and even region to region, and the so-called global
village is ever-closer to becoming a reality. The other is that within this major
current of internationalization, regions from all over the globe are increasi
ng
l
ya
wa
k
e
ni
ngt
oak
i
ndof“
s
e
a
r
c
h-for-r
oot
s
”c
ons
c
i
ou
s
ne
s
s
.The
s
et
wo
ma
j
o
rh
i
s
t
or
i
c
a
lt
r
e
nd
sof“
g
l
oba
l
i
z
a
t
i
on”a
nd“
i
nd
ig
e
ni
z
a
t
i
on”s
pu
re
a
c
h
other on and complement each other, forming a kind of dialectical relat
i
o
ns
hi
p
.Fr
om t
hi
sa
ng
l
eoft
hed
i
a
l
e
c
t
i
c
a
lde
v
e
l
opme
ntof“
g
l
oba
l
i
z
a
t
i
on”
a
nd“
i
nd
i
g
e
ni
z
a
t
i
on,
”wec
a
nd
i
s
c
ov
e
rt
ha
tt
heg
r
e
a
t
e
rt
hei
nd
i
g
e
nou
sc
ha
racter of knowledge or creative works, the more readily are they able to move
into the global and international arena. In other words, it is only on the
foundation of the preservation of indigenous qualities that globalization can
attain a genuinely worldwide significance.
The study of Confucianism must also re-equip its arsenal to deal with
the daily-s
t
r
e
ng
t
he
ni
ngt
i
de
sof“
g
l
oba
l
i
z
a
t
i
on”a
nd“
i
ndi
g
e
ni
z
a
t
i
on”i
nt
he
twenty-first century. On the one hand, we need to break through the
Sino-centric outlook which Ja
pa
ne
s
es
c
hol
a
rMI
ZOGUCHIYū
z
ō溝口雄三
c
r
i
t
i
c
a
l
l
yc
ha
r
a
c
t
e
r
i
z
e
da
s“
nat
i
ona
lpos
s
e
s
s
i
o
ni
s
m”(
Mi
z
og
u
c
hi1
9
8
9
:3
0
4
)
and move not only toward Asia, but further on into the entire world, looking
upon Confucianism as not only the common legacy of Asian civilizations,
but as a cultural resource in dialogue with other world civilizations. On the
257
Huang: East Asian Confucianism
________________________________________________________________
other hand, however, we must also pay attention to the particular characteristics of each East Asian region as revealed through the historical development of Confucianism. We must incorporate observation of both general
and particular aspects before we can grasp both the regional characteristics
of the history of East-Asian Confucianism and its more general value.
On the basis of such a conviction, I have tried to bring to light a new
vision for research in the history of East Asian Confucianism. In the second
section of this essay, I proposed to make interpretation of the Confucian
classics by East Asian Confucians the strategic point of our research, from
which to move on toward the construction of a Confucian hermeneutics. I
tried to elucidate the particular features of modes of thinking bearing
East-Asian cultural characteristics. In the third section, I offered two possible
di
r
e
c
t
i
onsf
ors
u
c
hr
e
s
e
a
r
c
h.
The“
hi
s
t
or
y
-of-idea
s
”me
t
hode
mphasizes the
“
l
i
ng
u
i
s
t
i
c
a
l
i
t
y
” of i
nt
e
r
pr
e
t
a
t
i
o
nsof t
hec
l
a
s
s
i
c
s
,whi
l
et
he “
i
nt
e
l
l
e
ctual-hi
s
t
or
y
”me
t
hods
t
r
e
s
s
e
st
he“
c
ont
e
xt
u
a
l
i
t
y
”oft
hei
nt
e
r
pr
e
t
e
r
.I
nt
he
fourth section, I offered some further possible directions for research from
the two angles of Confucian regionalism and the consciousness of issues
internal to the Confucian classics. 3
References
Abe, Yoshio 阿部吉雄.1
9
7
3
.“
TheCha
r
a
c
t
e
r
i
s
t
i
c
sofJ
a
pa
ne
s
eConf
u
c
i
a
ni
s
m.
”Acta Asiatica 5: 1-21.
___
_
.1
9
7
9
.“
The Influence of Chinese Confucianism upon Japan: The
Uniqueness of Japanese Confucianism 中國儒學思想對日本的影響﹕日本
儒學的特質.
”Tr
a
ns
.byGONG Ni
s
x
i
n龔霓馨. Chinese and Foreign Literature 《中外文學》 8.6: 164-177.
Brandauer, Frederick and Chun-chieh Huang, eds. 1994. Imperial Rulership and
Cultural Change in Traditional China. Seattle: University of Washington
Press.
Chan, Wing-t
s
i
t
.1
9
6
2
.“
Th
eEv
ol
u
t
i
o
noft
heNe
o-Confucian Concept of
Li a
sPr
i
nc
i
pl
e
.
”Tsing-hua Journal of Chinese Studies (N.S) 2: 123-148.
___
_
.1
9
6
7
.“
Ne
o-Conf
u
c
i
a
ni
s
m:Ne
wI
de
a
si
nOl
dTe
r
mi
no
l
og
i
e
s
.
”Philosophy East and West 17: 15-35.
Chen, Chun 陳淳. 1979. Mi
s
t
e
rBe
i
x
i
’
sDe
t
a
i
l
e
dExp
l
a
n
a
t
i
o
no
fPh
i
l
o
s
o
p
h
i
c
a
l
Te
r
ms
Ane
a
r
l
i
e
rChi
ne
s
ev
e
r
s
i
onoft
hi
sa
r
t
i
c
l
ewa
sr
e
a
da
tt
he“
International Conference on
Chinese Philosophy and Global Human Relations 中國哲學與全球倫理國際研討會,
”s
ponsored by the Philosophy Department of Suzhou 蘇州 University of Taiwan in May of 2000. I
would like to thank Professor Scott Cook of Grinnell College for translating this article into
English.
3
258
Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy
________________________________________________________________
《北溪先生字義詳講》. Taibei: Guangwen Shuju 廣文書局.
Chen, Xinxia 陳新夏. 1986. Introduction to the Cognitive Science《思維學引論》.
Changsha 長沙: Hunan Renmin Chubanshe 湖南人民出版社.
Chen, Zhaoying 陳昭瑛. 2000. Taiwanese Confucianism: Origin, Development, and
Transformation《台灣儒學﹕起源、發展、與轉化》. Taibei 臺北: Zhongzheng
Shuju 中正書局.
Chung, Edward Y. J. 1995. The Korean Neo-Co
n
f
u
c
i
a
n
i
s
mo
fYiT’
o
e
g
y
ea
n
dYi
Yu
l
g
o
k:
ARe
a
p
p
r
a
i
s
a
l
o
ft
h
e
“
Fo
u
r
-Se
v
e
nTh
e
s
i
s
”a
n
dI
t
s
Pr
a
c
t
i
c
a
l
I
mp
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
f
o
r
Self-Cultivation. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Gadamer, Hans-Ge
or
g
.1
9
7
6
.“
TheUni
v
e
r
s
a
l
i
t
yoft
heHe
r
me
ne
u
t
i
c
a
l
Pr
obl
e
m.
”I
nhi
sPhilosophical Hermeneutics. Trans. & ed. by David E.
Linge. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Huang, Junjie (Chung-chieh) 黃俊傑. 1997. A History of Mencian Scholarship 《孟
學思想史》
, vol. 2. Taibei 臺北: Zhongyang Yanjiuyuan Zhongguo Wenzhe
Yangjiusuo 中央研究院中國文哲研究所.
___
_
.1
9
9
9
a
.“
Ont
heHi
s
t
or
i
c
i
t
yofI
nt
e
r
pr
e
t
e
r
sofCl
a
s
s
i
c
sa
ndOt
he
rI
ssues from the Perspective of the History of Confucian Hermeneutics
of Classics 從儒家經典詮釋史觀點論解經者的歷史性及其相關問題.”Taiwan
University Journal of History 《台大歷史學報》(December ): 1-28.
___
_
.1
9
9
9
b
.“
I
TŌ J
i
ns
a
i
’
sI
nt
e
r
pr
e
t
a
t
i
onoft
heMe
nc
i
a
nS
c
hol
a
r
s
hi
p:I
t
s
Subject, Nature, and Significance 伊藤仁齋對孟子學的解釋﹕內容、性質與
含義.”I
nhi
s(
e
d
.
)Confucian Thought in Contemporary East Asia《儒家思想
在現代東亞》. Taibei 臺北: Zhongyang Yanjiuyuan Zhongguo Wenzhe
Yangjiusuo 中央研究院中國文哲研究所籌備處.
___
_
.2
0
0
0
.“
Chi
ne
s
eHe
r
me
ne
u
t
i
c
sa
sPol
i
t
i
c
s
:t
heS
on
gDe
ba
t
e
sov
e
rt
he
Mencius.
”I
nClassics and Interpretations: The Hermeneutic Tradition in Chinese
Culture, ed. by Ching-I Tu. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.
Huang, Junjie (Chun-c
hi
e
h)
,
e
t
.
a
l
.
1
9
9
7
.
“
Ont
heMe
t
hod
ol
og
yoft
heS
t
u
dy
of Chinese Political Thoughts 中國政治思想史研究方法試論.”Journal of
Humanity《人文學報》(December ): 1-43.
I
s
hi
da
,I
c
hi
r
ō石田一良 . 1996. “
ThePe
r
i
odsa
ndTr
a
ns
l
a
t
i
ono
fJ
a
pa
ne
s
e
Int
e
l
l
e
c
t
u
a
lHi
s
t
o
r
y
.
”Ki
ka
nNi
h
o
ns
h
i
s
ō
s
h
i《 季 刊 日 本 思 想 史 》 (July):
134-136.
I
t
ō,J
i
ns
a
i伊藤仁齋. 1971. The Meanings of the Analects and the Mencius《語孟子
義》.
Tōk
y
ō:
I
wa
na
mi
s
hot
e
n岩波書店.
____. 1973. The Ancient Meaning of the Analects 《論語古義》. In A Complete
Collection of Important Japanese Commentaries on the Four Books《日本名家四
書注釋全書》,
v
ol
.
3
.
Ed
i
t
e
db
yS
EKIGi
i
c
h
i
r
ō關儀一郎.
Tōk
y
ō東京:
Hō
shuppan 鳳出版.
____. 1988. Childish Questions 《童子問》. In Essays on Modern Intellectual History
《近世思想史文集》,
v
ol
.
1
.
Tōk
y
ō東京: Iwanami Shoden 岩波書店.
Li, Minghui 李明輝.2
0
0
1
.“
LIChu
ns
he
ng
’
sUnde
r
s
t
a
nd
i
ngofChi
ne
s
eCu
l-
259
Huang: East Asian Confucianism
________________________________________________________________
tural Classics 李春生所理解的中國文化經典.
”I
nhi
s(
e
d
.
)The Hermeneutic
Tradition of Chinese Classics II: Confucianism《中國經典解釋傳統 II﹕儒學篇》.
Taibei 臺北: Himalaya Foundation 喜馬拉雅研究發展基金會.
Liu, Baonan 劉寶楠. 1982. Rectified Meanings of the Analects 《論語正義》. Beijing
北京: Zhonghua Shuju 中華書局.
Lunyu. In Liu.
Maruyama, Masao 丸山真男.1
9
6
1
.“
Me
t
hodol
og
yofI
nt
e
l
l
e
c
t
u
a
lHi
s
t
or
y
:
Types, Scopes, and Subject Matter (Sh
i
s
ō
s
h
i
n
okangaekata ni tsuite—ruikei,
ka
n
’
i
,
t
a
i
s
h
ō
)
.
”I
nThe Method and Object of Intellectual History: Japan and West
Europe. Edited by Takeda Kiyoko 武田清子.
Tōk
y
ō東京:
S
ōbu
ns
ha創文
社.
____. 1974. Studies in the Intellectual History of Tokugawa Japan. Trans. by Mikiso
Hane. Tokyo: University of Tokyo Press.
Mencius. Trans. by D.C. Lau. London: Penguin Books, 1970.
Mi
z
og
u
c
hi
,Yū
mi溝口雄三. 1980. The Twists and Developments of the Pre-modern
Chinese Thoughts.Tōk
y
ō東京:Tōk
y
ōDa
i
g
a
k
uS
hu
ppa
nk
a
i東京大學出版
會.
____. 1989. China as Methodology (Hō
h
ōt
os
h
i
t
en
oCh
ū
g
o
ku
). Tōk
y
ō東京:
Tōk
y
ō
Daigaku Shuppankai 東京大學出版會.
___
_
.
1
9
9
5
.
“
ThePu
bl
i
ca
ndt
hePr
i
v
a
t
ei
nChi
na
.
”I
nhi
s(
e
d
.
)The Public and
the Private in China. Tōk
y
ō東京: Kenbun Shuppan 研文出版.
Mu
ne
s
h
i
ma
,Ky
ok
u
y
ū峰島旭雄, ed. 1977. Comparative Studies of Eastern and
Western Modes of Thinking 《東西思維型態的比較研究》.
Tōk
y
ō東京:
Tōk
y
ō
Shoseki Kabushiki Kaisha 東京書籍株式會社.
Nakamura, Hajime. 1964. Ways of Thinking of Eastern People: India, China, Tibet,
Japan. Edited by Philip P. Wiener. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
Polanyi, Michael. 1967. The Tacit Dimension. New York: Anchor Books.
Qian, Mu 錢穆. 1971. New Studies of Master Zhu《朱子新學案》. Taibei 臺北:
Sanmin Shuju 三民書局.
Song, Dexuan 宋德宣, et. al. 1991. Comparative Studies of Chinese and Japanese
Ways of Thinking《中日思維方式演變比較研究》. Shenyang 沈陽: Shenyang
Chubanshe 沈陽出版社.
Ta
ha
r
a
,
S
hi
r
ō田原嗣郎.
1
9
9
5
.
“
ThePu
bl
i
ca
ndt
hePr
i
v
a
t
ei
nJ
a
pa
n(
Nihon no
k
ōshi)
.
”In The Public and the Private in China (Ch
ū
g
o
kun
okōt
oshi). Edited
by MI
ZOGUCHIYū
mi
溝口雄三.
Tōk
y
ō東京: Kenbun Shuppan 研文出
版.
Tang, Junyi 唐君毅. 1966-75. Discourses on the Sources of Chinese Philosophy 《中
國哲學原論》. Hong Kong: Dongfang Renwen Xuehui 東方人文學會 &
Xinya Shuyuan 新亞書院研究院.
Van Zoeren, Steven. 1991. Poetry and Personality: Reading, Exegesis, and Hermeneutics in Traditional China. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Wu, Kuang-ming. 1997. On Chinese Body Thinking: A Cultural Hermeneutics.
260
Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy
________________________________________________________________
Leiden: E.J. Brill.
Xu
,
Fu
g
u
a
n.
1
9
8
2
.
“
AnEx
a
mi
na
t
i
onofaBa
s
i
cTo
pi
ci
nChi
ne
s
eI
n
t
e
l
l
e
c
t
u
a
l
Hi
s
t
or
y
:
‘
Kn
o
wi
ngt
heHe
a
v
e
nl
yComma
ndb
yFi
f
t
i
e
s
’
有關中國思想史中
一個基題的考察﹕釋論語『五十而知天命』.
”I
nhi
sA New Collection of Essays
on Chinese Intellecutal History《中國思想史論集續編》. Taibei 臺北: Shibao
Wenhua Chubanshe 時報文化出版社.
Yang, Rubin 楊儒賓. 1998. Confucian Philosophy of Body《儒家身體觀》. Taibei 臺
北: Zhongyang Yanjiuyuan Zhongguo Wenzhe Yanjiusuo 中央研究院中
國文哲研究所籌備處.
Yang, Rubin 楊儒賓& HUANG Junjie (Chun-chieh) 黃俊傑, eds. 1996. Exploring the Ancient Chinese Mode of Thinking《中國古代思維方式探索》. Taibei
臺北: Zhongzheng Shuju 中正書局.
Yu
,
Yi
ng
s
hi
.
1
9
7
4
.
“
DAIDo
ng
y
u
a
na
ndI
TŌJ
i
ns
a
i
戴東原與伊藤仁齋.
”Shihuo
Monthly《食貨月刊》(New Series) 4.9: 369-376.
___
_
.
1
9
7
6
.
“
Qi
ngDy
na
s
t
yConf
u
c
i
a
ni
s
ma
ndi
t
si
nt
e
l
l
e
c
t
u
a
l
t
r
a
d
i
t
i
on清代儒
學與知識傳統”(
l
e
c
t
u
r
e
)
.
Au
g
u
s
t7
.
Ta
i
be
i
.
Zhu, Xi 朱熹. N.D. Inquiries into the Mencius《孟子或問》. In The Posthumous Works
of Master Zhu 《朱子遺書》. Vol. 5. Taibei 臺北: Yiwen Yinshuguan 藝文
印書館.
____. 1983. Collected Annotations on the Mencius 《孟子集注》. In his Collected
Annotations on the Four Books 《四書章句集注》. Beijing 北京: Zhonghua
Shuju 中華書局.
____. 1983a. Collected Annotations on the Zhongyong《中庸集注》. In his Collected
Annotations on the Four Books 《四書章句集注》. Beijing 北京: Zhonghua
Shuju 中華書局.
____. 1986. Classified Sayings of Master Zhu 《朱子語類》. Edited by LI Jingde 黎
靖德. Beijing 北京: Zhonghua Shuju 中華書局.
____. 1994. Collected Annotations on the Analects 《論語集注》. In his Collected
Annotations on the Four Books 《四書章句集注》. Taibei 臺北: Da
’
a
nChubanshe 大安出版社.