requestId:68753c122e85c5.90431480.
The order structure of “Inner Saint and Outer King” and Chinese thinking
Author: Chen Yun
Source: Jiang Yangzhu, “Research on Political Philosophy” Second Edition (2024), Social Sciences and Literature Book Club
Abstract: The modern common practice of “Inner Saint and Outer King” is that one should be saints and kings in one’s self-cultivation, or it is best for the saint to be the supreme ruler. This understanding not only rarely gains character in reality, but also misunderstands the original language and practical core of the “inner sage and outer king”. The condition for the concept of “inner sage and outer king” is the structural transformation of “governance comes from one” from “three generations or more” to “governance comes from two” from “three generations or less”, and the division of power and energy is separated, and the two systems of governance and teaching have obtained the differentiation of independence. However, how to connect the two from the head based on differentiation, this is the original problem concept of the “inner sage and external king”. The core of the quality is to use internal and external structure education and governance to maintain balance, coordination and continuous in terms of separation. The distorted shape is the Legalist-style order concept of “inner sage and foreign teachers”. Modernists do not really understand that the inner sage and the outer king is a sequential conception, a way to reconstruct the structural correlation between the two differentiated areas of the governance and teaching, rather than a plan for the personal self-cultivation and world.
Introduction: Modern misreading of “the inner sage and the outer king”
Since Liang Qichao proposed the “The Way of the inner sage and the outer king” “, it contains all the Chinese academic practice, and its purpose is to be sufficient to cultivate within and to live in the world.” [1] Since then, “the inner sage and the outer king” has almost become a combination of Chinese thinking and the energy of civilization. Xiong Shili emphasized that “the six sects are the learning of the inner sage and the outer king. The inner sage takes the six sects as the sect, and takes the six sects as the sect, and takes the one who becomes the sect, and uses the whole country as the sect, and uses people as the sect” as the craft of heaven as the sect”[2]. If you focus on Chinese philosophy, Youyouran proposed: “According to the tradition of China, since the personality of a saint is the personality of a sage and a king outside, then the task of philosophy is to make people have this personality. Therefore, what philosophy talks about is the way of a Chinese philosopher who calls the inner sage and a king outside. This statement is very similar to the ‘philosopher-king’ as Plath. According to Plath, in a fantasy country, philosophers should be kings, or the king should be philosophers; a person should become a philosopher in order to become a Philosophers must go through long-term philosophical training so that their mind can ‘transform’ from the transformed world of things into the eternal world of reason. What Plata says and what Chinese philosophers say, they all believe that the task of philosophy is to give people the personality of inner sages and outer kings. “[3] In the Philosophical World, the inner sages and outer kings are associated with Plata’s “King of Philosophical World”, but Philosophical World also realizes that the King of Philosophical World can be achieved as long as it is in a fantasy country rather than a real country. If the Platic version of the fantasy country is ineffective in reality, then what is the meaning of the inner sage and outer kings that correspond to the Philosophical King? This is led to the perfection of personality, and the inner sage and the outer king are understood as two dimensions of the integrity of personality: “Chinese philosophy believes that a person not only completes this unity in theory and in external actions (the introductory note: refers to the unity of birth and entry), he is a saint.He was both born and born. …His personality is the so-called “inner sage and outer king”. The inner sage is about the achievements of his cultivation; the outer king is about his function in society. The saints have the chance to become leaders of actual politics. In fact, he must have no chance. The so-called “inner sage and outer king” is just to say that people with the highest energy to achieve success can be kings according to facts, and are most suitable for kings. As for whether he actually has the chance to be king or not, that is a different matter, and it is also full of great intentions. “[4] The highest achievement that a full-minded personality can achieve is understood by the Youli Lan as both a saint and a king. Although the Youli Lan knows that such a saint is very small, the highest ability to become a saint and a king are still regarded as the highest ability to become a saint and a king. Mou Zongsan raised the point of emphatic emphasis that the inner saint and the outer king “was the full use of Confucianism and the full scale.” [5]; The inner sage is related to moral character, “Everyone must establish his own moral character and his own moral character through the reality of morality”, while the outer king sees the Confucian political management idea, “to do doomsy things under politics”[6]; The inner sage is “the skill of governing oneself in the inner world and being a saint to establish our own moral character. The ‘Outer King’ means to do politics outside and to do domineering”[7]. Even so, Mou Zongsan still saw that “the inner sage’s kung fu is something that everyone can do…the outer sage is different”, “the inner sage’s kung fu is not only that everyone can do, and must do it. This is the first meaning.”[8] This means that the inner sage and the outer king are led to the self-perfection of individuals, including the two dimensions of personal virtue and politics. Moreover, the reason why the inner sage is internal is that virtue is the first meaning, and politics is the second meaning, “the inner sage is the master” and “the first thing to say is morality”[9 ].
The above interpretation of the inner sage and outer king has been carried out in modern language, and is to review Chinese traditional science based on the positioning of modern science. Therefore, Mou Zongsan thought that the inner sage and outer king as a fantasy is no longer suitable for modern times. The external king’s affairs should be unrestrained and dominant politics. [10] Even Rongyoulan, Xiong Shili and others cannot believe that tomorrow’s goal is to become a saint and a king. In this way, the inner saint and the outer king are a contemporary concept, and the era belongs to it has alreadyMaintaining a monthly price has become history. It seems that “it is now today that the king has been wiped out for a long time, and then the title of “Inner Saint and Outer Saint” is not suitable for today’s energy”[11]. People who are deeply influenced by Eastern Thoughts can emphasize, “The Achievement of Inner Saint” The inner sage and outer king are the outer kings”[12]. It seems that the inner sage and outer kings are no longer meaningful for modern times. On the contrary, what needs to be rescued and transformed happens to be the inner sage and outer kings who have been judged as traditional thinking and Confucianism based on this. The outer kings are just modern concepts, and tomorrow they must be modernized. Some scholars even believe that the inner sage and outer kings areThe king’s fantasy has a high level of dependence on the rulers, so it has become “the most difficult issue in China’s traditional political management” [13].
The above understanding is that since it is based on the “King of Philosophy” that equals the inner sage and outer kings, this scene promotes misunderstanding, so the sage should be regarded as kings to understand the inner sage and outer kings, and there is no opinion on the distinction between inside and outside and sage kings. It is also based on the wrong modern imagination of modern people. According to this imagination, modern China is a kind of sage that does not resemble sages, kings do not resemble lords, inside and outside, and outside, a group is completely tight and lacks division. If this view is reversed to the understanding of energy breakthrough since Jaspers and Voglin, this means that Chinese thinking has never had the energy breakthrough based on the division between experience and super experience, the division of power and energy, or perhaps the division between nature and history as the mark. This misunderstanding comes from the myth of taking modern conceptual consciousness as the correct standard to the traditional power balance. More importantly, this pre-energy understanding made the “inner sage and outer king” only become the past, and there is no meaning for the present and the future. In fact, the request to take the sage and the king as the realization of self-cultivation is absolutely not realistic. In essence, any kind of thinking may be the goal or goal of a saint, but no mature thinking will make it the king the goal of learning. A perfect personality that is established by both becoming a saint and becoming a king is impossible in ancient and modern times. S TC:
發佈留言