requestId:68499aab993155.71885498.
The modern turn of “Confucius” abstraction
——Zhang Taiyan’s Confucius View
Author: Chen Bisheng
Source: “Chinese Journal of Nationalities” 2015 Issue 3
Time: Confucius 2Baoqing WebsiteFifth and sixty-eighth years old Dingyou March 3rd day Bingchen
Jesus March 30, 2017
【Abstract】
In the process of transformation from traditional to modern academics, Zhang Taiyan is the main turning point. Zhang Taiyan regarded his studies as history, so Confucius’ contribution to the Six Paths was no longer legislated for later generations, but rather the task of writing history and spreading history. Zhang Taiyan’s long-term understanding of concepts such as Monarch, Confucianism, and Suwang also reformed these traditional key concepts, making Confucius no longer the Suwang or saint whom the tradition understands, but a modern Chinese historical figure, which changed the traditional abstraction of Confucius. After Zhang Taiyan, modern science became excited, and Confucius was regarded as a philosopher, thinker, and teacher in modern science, and thus destroyed all the sacred light circles in Confucius.
【Note】
In the transformation of modern Chinese academics in the early 20th century, the academic collapse and modern sciences were established. The most classic representation of this is the evaluation of Confucius. In traditional science, Confucius is not only a historical figure, but also a representative of Chinese civilization. His differences and evaluation of Confucius directly determines the differences between academics and Confucianism. In terms of generality, the modern literature of the two Han Dynasty believed that Confucius was the sixth chapter and established a king. Therefore, Confucius was the “Su King” who legislated the legislative position of Gao Zhou Gong. He believed that Confucius “reported but did not write” and “from Zhou” were the collector of the literary traditions of the sage kings and the “saint”; the Song and Ming dynasties believed that Confucius was the inheritance of the former and the latter in the “Tao Sect” and passed on the Six Paths to teach people, so Confucius was the last “saint” and “the master”. In modern academic transformation, the key to evaluating Confucius is to separate Confucius from the Six Sects, and to alienate Confucius as history, and to alienate Confucius from Jizi. Confucius became a “thinking school” and a “teacher” and a representative of Confucianism among Jizi. Therefore, Confucius stepped down from the “holy forefather” and became the teacher with no kind in “Theory”. And in this process,The difference is that Zhang Taiyan. [1] Zhang Taiyan regarded Liu Yue as ancient history and Confucius as historian, and opened up a new understanding of modern academics, which influenced the “new learning” after the May Fourth Movement.
1. Confucius’ background color: “Ancient and good historians”
Zhang Taiyan’s evaluation of Confucius has both opinions based on reality and changes in the past and after, as well as opinions that are rooted in the standpoint and have never changed. From an overview, Zhang’s early years of “A Brief Discourse on the Learning of the Book of the Book of Confucius” ① , which greatly damaged Confucius. The middle-aged “A Review of the Book of Confucius” ② was determined by Confucius as a “good historian”. Later, his evaluation of Confucius became higher and higher, especially when he studied in his late years, he even confirmed Confucius in his second grade.
Zhang Taiyan’s evaluation of Confucius in his life was often randomly developed, especially the political texts before the Xinhai Rebellion. In a letter to Liu Wenzheng in 1922, Zhang Taiyan said:
I am not talented in the basic teachings of young people, but only believes in ancient classics and is a backdrop of Taoism with Chang Suli. Later, he was very embarrassed by the long-time Confucianism, and then he became excited and became enlightened. After middle age, the classics of ancient Chinese remained the same, and the Kongs never talked about it. [2](P741)
Zhang Taiyan here clearly admitted that the “Kong Kong” in the early years was to fight against the Confucianism advocated by Kang You. In fact, before the Xinhai Rebellion, Zhang Taiyan’s statement about Confucius’s words were mostly mutual and contradictory, all due to political needs, not academics. For example, on September 7, 1897, the “Last Saint” was published in the “Practical Report”, calling Confucius the “water essence” and “made”, in order to express Xunzi’s “Last Saint” as Confucius’ “Last Saint” [Cultivate the Love Woman3] (P37). The “The Trinity Review” published on May 20, 1899, was called “The Year of the Year is based on the Yuan Dynasty, and the Spring King is King Wen. Who is the King of Wen? The King of Wen missed the time and thought that Confucius was the first to be the Lord of Wen”[4] (P85). Therefore, the “Yang” was published in “The Ram”, and Confucius was the King of Su, and his goal was to prove that Confucius could be the emperor at that time. However, on December 25 of the same year, Zhang published a more academic “Different and Modern Literature” in the “Asian Times News”, and immediately changed to the scene, saying that “Confucius was dedicated to Shun, and his leisure was not a specialty in production” [5] (P109), which was to study it by Liao Ping’s respect for Confucius and rebelling against Kang Youxian.
However, through Zhang Taiyan’s political theory, Zhang had a stable and basic understanding of Confucius. This explanation was not changed by a moment of political affairs, but was determined by Zhang’s life’s standing. This standing is what Zhang’s self-described “only believe in ancient classics”. In modern literary studies, Confucius wrote “Year”Baohuang.com VIP, established a king’s great law, “Year” is the story of Qi Huan Hang’s article, the history of literature, and the most important thing is its “meaning”, which is the meaning of Confucius, that is, the subtle meaning invented in “Gongyang Bi”. However, ancient literature studies emphasize that Confucius “reports but does not write”. Even if he “writes “Year”” it is just a translation of history and abridged. The regular version of “Year” is a historical event in “Zuo Shi”. Zhang did not count the number of people who talked about Confucius during his life, but the most basic point was his clear positioning of Confucius in his re-recorded “Classic Book” and added the article “Classic Book” in 1902:
Kong is an ancient history. According to Qiu Ming, the second place is “Year”, which is compared with hundreds of schools, and it is like a roar of jade. He discussed and followed him, and later he found the “Seven Notes”. When Confucius passed away, the one who was actually a brave man was Liu Xin of Han. [6]Baoqing.com dcard (P51)
Taking Confucius as a “good historian” is actually a shocking and unprecedented discussion. And pulling Confucius to the relationship between Zuo Qiuming, Sima and Sima father and son, and Liu Xin was the same that later generations had never developed it. In history, there is indeed a difference in understanding Confucius. Nowadays, literary scholars regard Confucius as the “Su King” with virtue and incompetence, ancient literary scholars regard Confucius as a saint who does not make a name for himself, and intellectuals regard Confucius as the most sage and predecessor. Zhang Taiyan directly regarded Confucius as a “good historian”, which was actually to confront the modern literary scholar’s “King of Su”. Zhang Taiyan said that the six books are all historical books, namely historical books, and Confucius used private components rather than historical components to cut them off. Then Confucius was a historian. The most powerless part of Zhang Tai’s study of ancient Chinese literature that he correctly saw that the most important thing to talk about Confucius was Confucius as a student and a conscientious person, not Confucian Confucius as one of the scholars, and also Confucius as a student and a conscientious person, and Confucius as a student and a conscientious person, the most important thing to talk about Confucius through “Year”. Zhang’s most important works in his early years were “Reading the Year of the Left of the Year” (who was born in 1896, three years before the first edition of “The Book of the Book”, and Zhang’s 29 years old) and “Reading the Year of the Year of the Year”, while his most important works in his late years were “Reading the Questions of the Year of the Year of the Year” (written in 1929). ③It can be said that the study of “Age” is the basic background of Zhang’s academic vie
發佈留言