Xinshun 1730

Chapter 1085

So based on this idea, after hundreds of years of Ye Shi's death, a new thing has ushered in.

That is Catholicism.

The idea of ​​using Yebu Confucianism was very popular in the late Ming Dynasty for a period of time.

But as Dashun officially recognized the knowledge of the Yongjia Yongkang School, many great Confucians immediately became alert.

In other words, they made the same mistake as they did when they fought against Buddhism.

Get rid of the concepts of God and God, and make them belong to others.

Take the trap set by others, jump into it yourself, use other people's way of thinking to transform your own knowledge, and then fight against other people's knowledge.

So at the end of the change, is it still Confucianism?

Originally, after reflection at the end of the Ming Dynasty, many people were quite dissatisfied with Song Confucianism, and felt that they had completely misinterpreted the original meaning of Confucianism, so they wanted to break Cheng Zhu and get closer to Confucius and Mencius.

The issue of Catholicism has been tricked again.

In this case, Dashun directly chose the administrative order to ban religion by force, argue with a hammer, and make up for it with a hammer?
Later, in the form of the emperor's edict, "practical learning" and "western learning" were directly decomposed.

Anything that doesn’t involve things like God, Creation, Dao, Qi, etc. is considered practical.

And things that involve the spiritual level such as God, Tao, Qi, Tai Chi, etc. are considered Western learning.

This kind of closed violence prohibition is considered by the great Confucians as the inheritance of Dashun's inheritance of Yongjia and Yongkang's school of culture.

In short, according to the learning of the Yongjia and Yongkang schools, or Ye Shi’s views on orthodoxy, if one day in the future, you want to take other people’s things and find similar views from Confucianism to fight against, then this in itself is a fake Confucianism.

True Confucianism should be based on the Three Dynasties and the Six Classics as the narration, you say yours, and I say mine.

Ye Shi believes that looking at oneself from the standpoint of others, or changing oneself according to the standpoint of others, is the greatest betrayal of Confucianism.

This is "self-transformation into barbarians".

The basis of Confucianism is human relations, propriety, righteousness, benevolence, loyalty and trustworthiness, and the systems derived from them are pure reality.

The focus of Tianzhu Buddhism is the joy, anger, sorrow, and joy of the human body, and it is the empty and mysterious pursuit of truth and falsehood.

The standpoints of the two are different. Why do you have to develop things like xinxing in your own knowledge to fight against others?
It's like, why do you have to add ups and downs to a system that evaluates green, red, and black?You talk about your ups and downs, and I talk about my black, white, green and red.

Ye Shi's counterattack against Song Confucianism is here.

There was a big problem with the theoretical construction of his previous Yongjia School.

They recognized the orthodoxy of Cheng Zhu and others, but on the basis of recognition, they focused on history, practical learning, and utilitarianism, and talked about merit and actual achievements.

Then there is one not to lose?

Acknowledge the fate and the system of mind and nature, and then play utilitarianism and meritorious deeds under this system. If you are undefeated, you will be damned.

Ye Shi, on the other hand, directly drew his salary from the bottom of the pot.

To put it plainly, Neo Confucianism is not a Confucian orthodoxy at all, it is pure heresy.

If you don't recognize the Neo-Confucianism system at all, you won't be suppressed by the theory of destiny and destiny to suppress such things as work and actual achievements.

If you want to understand true Confucianism, you must return to the original source.

Abandoning Mencius's original interpretation of Confucianism, re-emphasizing the Six Classics, and directly understanding real Confucianism is to follow the path of retro-innovation.

But the problem lies in this "stand".

The Yongjia Yongkang school is about utilitarianism.

Ye Shi has his own explanation for utilitarianism.

Utilitarianism depends on the purpose.

"Diligence and hard work to eliminate suffering and benefit the people" is the kingly way of Yao, Shun, Yu Wenwu and others.

That is to say, the utilitarian purpose of painstakingly solving the sufferings of the people and making the people benefit is the kingly utilitarian.

But the problem is, in order to practice the kingly way, he also opposes Chen Liang's "combination of king and bully".

To say that it was utilitarian after Qin is to misinterpret the original meaning of utilitarianism.

For example, the merit of Han Fei, Li Si and others was to annex the six countries. Is this the achievement of the king?

Zhang Liang, Chen Ping, and Chen Ping are the models of ministers and meritorious service of later generations. Are their merits and the merits they say are the same thing?
Including Zhuge Liang, people at the time explained that although he was overbearing, his actions were close to kingly.But Zhuge Liang only used hegemony for the restoration of the Han Dynasty, so how could it be regarded as close to the kingly way?

At this point, there was a conflict with Chen Liang, who was regarded as a schoolmate.

What era did Chen Tongfu live in?It is the era of Jingkang's shame.

What kind of person is he?
It is said that Xin Qiji's Poetry Poetry originated from the fact that Chen Liang rode a horse across the river. The horse was afraid, and approached the river three times and retreated three times. Leaning on the window and witnessing it, he was cited as a confidant.

Just that era.

Just that temper.

Chen Liang naturally used both kings and hegemons, and even directly said, who owns the Confucian orthodoxy?

In the hands of Tang Zong, Han Wu, and the emperors of the Han and Tang Dynasties, they are the ones who have truly inherited the orthodoxy.

On the one hand, it is because of the factors of the times.

On the other hand, it is also for philosophy.

Neo-Confucianism believes that after Mencius, orthodoxy declined, which led to the invasion of Buddhism, and there was no orthodoxy in the Han and Tang Dynasties.

But Chen Liang believes that, just as the Tao is eternal, then the Han and Tang Dynasties existed in reality. Could it be that the common people at that time lived in a daze without the Tao?

Tao is not empty, it has to rely on affairs to exist, or in other words, it has to be manifested by utilitarianism.

During the Han and Tang Dynasties, the people were rich, and foreign wars frequently hit the northern grasslands and expeditions to the Western Regions. Obviously, the Han and Tang Dynasties were not only not without morality, but very moral. Otherwise, how to explain why the Han and Tang Dynasties were not beaten to Pian'an West Lake?
Therefore, "the initial aspirations of Tang Zong and the Han ancestors may not be any different from those of Shang Tang and King Wu. Although they may have made some small mistakes, such as rushing to ascend the throne, the problem is not serious. The so-called never loses the original heart of saving the people, great achievements and great virtues It has already conquered the world."

There was a long verbal battle between him and Zhu Xi because of this matter.

Chen Liang said that not only did the Han and Tang Dynasties inherit Taoism, but in fact, the rule of the three generations was also used by kings and hegemons.Not all benevolent at all.

The so-called Three Dynasties is the kingly way, but the Han and Tang Dynasties are not kingly ways. It is nothing more than that the Three Dynasties have achieved some things to the extreme, but the Han and Tang Dynasties have not achieved the ultimate.Not much difference.

Zhu Xi replied to him, "Brother, look at what Tang Zong, Han and Wu did, and look at their hearts. Is it out of righteousness? Or out of profit? Is it out of righteousness? Or is it out of evil? Obviously, the heart of Tang Zong, Han and Wu is all Out of profit, out of evil."

"If it is said that the establishment of a country is strong and has a long history, it is the right thing to do. Your thinking is very dangerous. You clearly judge right from wrong based on success or failure."

And Zhu Xi also put forward the importance of the sixteen-character mental method for the first time in the chatter with Chen Liang.

Of course, spraying each other to the end, it's nothing.

Zhu Xi fell into Chen Liang's trick, and really made a fuss about the Han and Tang orthodoxy.

To say that the minds of the Han and Tang Dynasties were not righteous is just "coinciding" with orthodoxy, but in fact it is not orthodoxy at all.

Chen Liang retorted that a coincidence is also a coincidence, as if all the people in the world are blind at once, do you say that the sun does not exist?Tao always exists, and coincidence is unity.

Then, for some reason, Zhu Xi stopped talking about it, probably because he felt that Chen Liang was just making excuses and didn't bother to argue.

Of course, the reasons why Dashun chose the Yongjia Yongkang school of learning in an attempt to establish orthodoxy could not be more obvious.

At that time, the situation was more dangerous than Jingkang's humiliation.

Also talk about the hammer out of righteousness?Out of profit?
Just do it.

Moreover, after the founding of Dashun, he compared himself with Li Tang.

He also took the method of humiliating Confucian scholars, so he really hoped to be considered as having inherited the orthodoxy.

But the question is, does Confucianism recognize Chen Liang's set of things?
How could it be possible.

The rule of the Three Dynasties is actually the combination of kings and tyrants?

The so-called kingly way and domineering actually come from the same source?

The Han and Tang Dynasties and the rule of the Three Dynasties are just the difference between "exhaustive" and "endless"?

The Han and Tang Dynasties and the rule of the Three Dynasties are essentially the same, but the rule of the Three Dynasties was done well, and the Han and Tang Dynasties were not done well in some places. The difference between the two is purely "quantity" and there is no "quality" difference?

Chen Liang's set of knowledge may be just his own belief that his set is Confucianism.

I can't stand at all.

Therefore, even Ye Shi also talked about Chen Liang's Wang Ba and used it, but Chen Liang asked Ye Shi to write the epitaph before he died, because there was really no one else.

Moreover, his theoretical construction is indeed insufficient.

And it was Ye Shi who finally made up for these theories.

However, after Ye Shi made up for it, he went to the path of "self-restraint, restoration of propriety, and benevolence", and he wanted to build "the achievements of the kingly way", but he still couldn't go through it later.

In short, it is feasible to change Chen Liang's theory.

But that’s not Confucianism, the flavor of heresy is too strong, so strong that it is impossible for any Confucianist to admit that the Han, Wu and Tangzong held orthodoxy in their hands, and it is even more impossible to admit that the rule of the Three Dynasties is actually the same as that of the Han and Tang Dynasties.

Ye Shi's set of things complemented Chen Liang's theory, but it was not feasible.

It looks like Confucianism, but if you don't care about your heart, don't talk about your heart, and want to build a kingly achievement, and your utility must conform to the kingly way, then you have to be polite.

There must be something that proves that you are king in what you do, right?
And the key thing is Ye Shi, if you can't do it well, then you will go to the fundamentalism.

This is a school that even Mencius denied.

In this case, it is conceivable that the situation of Dashun is "broken but not established".

But it is not really broken to the point of the Yongjia Yongkang School, so broken that even Zengzi and Mencius did not recognize the orthodoxy inherited.

Including those extreme retroists, they are also close to Confucius and Mencius, but they are not close to three generations and six classics of Confucius.

It broke Neo Confucianism, but not all of it.

If the new orthodoxy cannot be established, who would dare to deny Mencius' orthodoxy?

Moreover, Dashun raised troops, not to expel the soldiers raised by the Tartars, but to rebel against the original Ming Dynasty, which needs the support of Mencius' theory.

Although it is said that the real stand is to drive out the Tartars, but the new and the old can't negate each other.

It can't be said that Li Zicheng's old Shun is a thief, but the new Shun after Jiugong Mountain is orthodox?
This requires the platform of Mencius, and it is really impossible to deny Mencius.

Zhejiang University was established, but not fully established.

A whole system cannot be built, only a few words can be used to make do with it.Dashun used himself to compare Li Tang, but he didn't really lick his face and say that Han and Tang were the same as the three generations.

To put it more simply, which Confucianism taught Liu Yu to encroach on land in Huainan? Is this the kingly way?Liu Yu himself was too embarrassed to put money on this matter, and several subsequent incidents that happened afterwards made the nature of this matter even more confusing.

(End of this chapter)