requestId:684c3e47b0fdb7.98873474.

The Destiny of Lima and the Confucian Destiny

Author: Shang Wenhua (Associate Researcher, Institute of Philosophy, Shandong Academy of Social Sciences)

Source: “World Religion and Civilization” Issue 1, 2021

Abstract: How to deal with the relationship between people and people is a problem that must be faced by any mature form of civilization, and it is also a question that cannot be discussed in the past when talking between different forms of civilization. Four hundred years ago, the initial ideological dialogue between China and the West was unfolding at this level, but it has never received profound reflection. Confucianism failed to accept the logic of Lima Tsuna’s speech, and Lima Tsuna also failed to reflect on his emotional God under the comfort of “the will of destiny”. Re-referring this thought dialogue today will make us see that if Confucianism wants to establish itself in the modern world of thinking, it has to accept the analytical thought of definition and logic; if sensory theology wants to allow human preservation to be conserved from the perspective of energy, it has to meet the “destiny system” or “consideration” inwardly. Returning to the first encounter and dialogue in history, we can provide a basic coordinate for the in-depth ideological and transportation between China and the West today, to examine each other in tradition and tradition.

 

Keywords: God; destiny; interested in goodness; unintentional in goodness; Baobao.com ppt

 

Any mature form of civilization will have some kind of beyond the consciousness. The beyond makes this civilization double open and can further obtain new information. Both Eastern Christian civilization and Chinese classical civilization are like this. In the former, the transcendent is opened in the method of “reverence”, which is the existence of God; in the latter, the transcendent is opened in “respect” and “integrity”, which is the existence of heaven. [1] The difference is that in worship, God directly lies in man’s life; while in respect and sincerity, man more appreciates what he has given to him, that is, to lead and receive his own destiny.

 

At the end of the 16th century, the “Catholic System” in worship and the “Destiny System” in respect and sincerity had the first comprehensive traffic and collision. Due to various reasons, this traffic and collision has become more ineffective in the civilization level, but has never gained a deep understanding and clarity in the most focused thinking level, namely, what kind of transcendence, and how to talk about each other’s transcendence. [2] Four hundred years later, especially after we have gained a relatively sufficient understanding of Western science, it is necessary to return to this conversation from the beginning to examine what kind of thought-level communication occurred between us (traditional Confucianism) and them (Christian theology) four hundred years ago, and what they had missed in this communication.

 

“Enjoy good” or “intentional good” most clearly depicts the difference between the “Catholic system” of Lima and the “Cithical System” of Confucianism in terms of words exceeding those Baobao.com rating. It is precisely this difference, which implies the machine that two parties are dying each other. This article uses analytical methods to present the ideological meaning and preservation meaning hidden in this destiny, so as to grasp the sensory theology system of Rima and the destiny system of Confucianism, and analyzes why they can rebel against each other. These analysis shows that four hundred years later, we still have to face this final problem, namely: if the Confucian system of destiny still has real vitality, it needs to abide by perceptual logic; the “Catholic system” of Lima also needs comfort from the concept of destiny to deepen its connotation of worship.

 

1. From the discussion of “interested in good deeds” and “unintentional in good deeds”, good deeds are one of the most important problems in Chinese and Western civilizations. It is the main thing for preserving individuals, and it is also the key to whether people can form a society and whether they can form a better society that is suitable for all individuals to preserve. But many times, an action is good for this person, or perhaps it is good for this person, but it is bad for another person; and from a larger perspective, behavior is good for this group or that group, but not for another group or cooperation. In order to maintain a better life, seeking a broader and more good than this or that is necessary is absolutely necessary.

 

For individuals or small groups, goodness is always a product of judgment from their own situations. Then goodness itself transcends any specific situation, otherwise it is subject to judgment from the specific situations and cannot become broad good. In other words, goodness (self) is not a discriminatory product of individuals or a certain group. If you can raise questions like good that transcends specific judgments, you can prove that good (or the preservation of individuals) has a higher and deeper source; this source is not a product that is subject to the judgment of the situation. In this regard, Zhang Xuan said: “It is a big man; it is a good thing to be correct and things to be correct; it is difficult to avoid the burden of being interested in. If you are interested in being good, it is profitable, and it is false; if you are unintentionally good, it is a kindness, and it is a kindness. If you are interested in being good, it is a kindness, and it is not done, it is a kindness to be interested in not good! Confucius finally learned from the beginning to achieve virtue and exhausted the teachings of both ends.” [3]

 

The judgment is based on “mind”The judgment made from the situation is “interesting”. Interesting goodness is to make choices that are conducive to preservation according to the situation. For the present preservation, it is good, but for a certain “profit”, Zhang Shu believes that this is a “false”, that is, goodness that is far away from the situation. Therefore, goodness that is controlled by the situation is correct because it is a certain preservation of the preservation of certain directions (benefits); goodness that is smoothly met in judgment is correct because of the change of the situation (thing) and the behavior changes the situation (thing) and makes it smoothly meet the goodness in judgment. From this, “correcting oneself and correcting things” is made by “interesting”, so it is “interesting to be good”. In terms of differences, the good self transcends the situation and its judgments from the situation, for people, it cannot be presented in “interested”; but it also has some connection with human preservation, otherwise such a problem cannot be raised in the most basic way. In the view of Confucian tradition, the goodness presented in “unintentional” or “unintentional goodness” is derived from nature, “from it”, that is, it is developed from the nature itself. “The nature of destiny of heaven” (“Doctor of the Mean”) is said to be exactly this kind of nature that is given by destiny of heaven. Behaviors derived from nature, because they are not subject to circumstances, are not the result of judgment. While “correcting oneself”, they also make things correct, that is, when they respond to the fate of heaven, things make themselves smoothly meet the fate of heaven (right), rather than being “right” by being judged.

 

So, “correct yourself and things are correct” refers to the origin of heaven. When responding to the origin of heaven, “correct yourself” (also “Ji”) and “righteous things”. After Zhang Xu, Zhu Xi’s lineup, or the King of the Lu family, they all adhered to the basic insight of Confucianism. However, the former focuses on “respect”, that is, to realize the “cultivation” in life through “respect for heaven”; the latter focuses on “integrity”, that is, to realize the enlightenment of one’s confidant through “confidence”. In other words, if you want to understand and even be good at yourself, you need to be in the “respect” and “integrity” of “heaven” beyond the “heaven”. In this preservation state, the preservation requirement is abandoned by its own active judgment and choice, and “allows” itself to participate in the heavenly movement, thus allowing the granted “destiny” to be carried out successfully. In the movement of destiny, both “people” and “things” return to their original state, from “right”. Such “righteousness” is “goodness”. From the perspective of “correcting oneself and everything is upright”, “being good is inadvertent”.

 

From thinking about oneself and its relationship with those who exceed, “being good without intention” is the right meaning of real good. After all, human preservation is always subject to the specific situation, and all “good” that comes from the specific situation is infinite, so it is not true good; and if true goodness is realized, just jump o