If you are poor, you will be immune. Indeed, Mencius originally said, "If you are poor, you will be immune to it. Generosity is good. "
This world. "Later generations are used to" reaching "first and then" being poor ",and changing" being good and poor "into" ji ji "does not lose Mencius.
Original meaning. But I really think that if a person really wants to "be good at his body" and "help the world", that is still true.
It is better to change the title of this article to "if you are poor, you will help the world, and if you are up, you will be immune to it."
The popular view in the history of thought is that "if you are rich, you will help the world, and if you are poor, you will be immune to it", which is regarded as China.
The embodiment of "Confucianism and Taoism complement each other" in the cultural essence: the first half of the sentence expresses the idealism of Confucianism and the spirit of joining the WTO.
The second half of the sentence shows an open-minded attitude and the realm of birth. However, from the perspective of "text history", this
This statement is obviously flawed: as mentioned above, the whole sentence originated from Mencius and has nothing to do with Taoism.
Close. However, it seems that Taoism, Laozi and Zhuangzi have never said such things as "goodness".
. On the contrary, the original Taoism advocates "abandoning benevolence and righteousness" to deconstruct morality and pursue no right and wrong, no good and evil.
The realm of "carefree" does not emphasize personal moral cultivation. It's like saying that the first half is Confucianism and the second half is Taoism.
It's hard to convince.
But if we remove the moral meanings of "saving the world" and "being independent", we can only understand it.
For "doing something" and "doing nothing", this sentence (not just the second half) has become a pure Taoist thought.
People often only regard "inaction" as a Taoist proposition. In fact, at least Zhuang Zhou, a Taoist master, also has a pursuit.
The hopeful side. In Zhuangzi Waipian Sam, Zhuang Zhou once compared himself to "Teng Ape": "He got it.
Nanzi also took its branch, while Wang Chang was in the meantime, although it was easy and not arrogant. He got bitter oranges and bitter oranges.
Sometimes, the dangerous line looks sideways and vibrates to mourn chestnuts. This muscle is not urgent or soft, inconvenient and not enough.
Show your talent. "The monkey embraced the noble tree, and he won the championship." During this period, Wang Chang, although easy and,
Don't be arrogant. "Once you fall into a thorn, you will pick up your tail and be a man." Look sideways and shake. "
Sorrow is chestnut. " In other words, in Zhuang Zhou's view, people in power are "promising" and so-called "inaction"
"That is," the situation is inconvenient, not enough to show its ability "when the way of life:" Today's confused phase.
If you want to be tireless, can you get evil? "
As we all know, Taoism advocates the "inaction" of the unity of knowledge and action. On "inaction"
",there is no right or wrong. The "inaction" of the strong to the weak can be understood as tolerance, and the weak "do whatever it takes" to the strong.
"Yes, you will be trapped. The inaction of power to right means freedom, while the inaction of right to power.
"This means slavery. Some people in the history of thought (for example, Tan Sitong praised Zhuangzi's deconstruction of monarchy in the late Qing Dynasty).
This is a theory of inaction in the former sense. But traditionally, the principle of "inaction" is implemented in the latter sense.
Undoubtedly the mainstream. The problem is that the so-called inaction of Taoism is precisely a kind of "gentleness" mainly aimed at the weak.
Theory, the weak "inaction" to the strong, isn't it you?
Helplessness is not enough. However, Zhuang Zhou's reluctance is not self-reliance, but service.
For the lofty realm. In this realm, authenticity, existence, right and wrong, good and evil can be distinguished, or all of them.
Indispensable "; That's all, that's all. ""He is right and because of him. " "Before the party.
, can't; Cause is cause, cause is not cause. ""there, too, and he's there. He is also right and wrong.
This is also a right and wrong. If there is any fruit, what is it? What if there is no fruit? ""evil? However, naturally. evil
Or what? Otherwise, it is not. ..... nothing. Otherwise, nothing is impossible. ..... complex and strange, in a way.
"This passage in" Zhuangzi's Inner Chapter, Theory of Homogeneous Things "has always been regarded as the essence of Taoist thought by theorists. about
Indeed, one of the major drawbacks of China's traditional era is that words and deeds are not the same, and the Confucian set of benevolence, righteousness and morality only talks but does not act.
The family's larded school about "law, technique and potential" only doesn't say, so-called "Confucianism" also. but
The above sophistry of Taoism is inherently incompatible "; "Confucianism" and "magic" provide the key adhesion.
The mixture adds effective lubricating oil to the fierce friction between Wang Tai and hegemonic logic.
Deer are horses, and Confucianism says that if it is not a horse, it will pit; It is not Confucian to say that this horse is also true. And Zhuangzi said: Horse.
Also, deer is also a horse, so-called "everything is in harmony". Therefore, the deer is a deer, and Confucianism is also; Compare a deer to a horse.
, you are a great scholar. Who said "big"? It goes beyond the common view of right and wrong and is for the sake of "realistic people" and "human beings"
Yes So: Legalists are Confucianism, and Confucian law is also Confucian law. And those who express Confucianism in the law are great scholars! -Zhuang Zhou
Logic is enough to demonstrate such "noble and shameless"!
To sum up, it is necessary to interpret the truth that "reaching is promising and poverty is inaction" from the perspective of Taoism.
In fact, it means that if you have power, you are king, and if you lose power, you are a slave. This is natural.
Contrary to Mencius' intention. Mencius dedicated words are:
"Mencius said Song Yue:' Is Zi good at swimming? My son travels. People know, but they are also embarrassed; I don't know,
It's noisy, too "Why are you making so much noise?" Yue:' Respect morality and music, and you can make noise. therefore
A poor and heartless scholar can't get away from Tao. Poor and disloyal, so the scholar has his own way; People are not disappointed because they can't get rid of Tao.
Ancient people, success, Zejia people; If you don't succeed, cultivate your morality and see the world. If you are poor, you will be immune to it, and if you are up to it, you will be good at heaven.
Go down. "
This is obviously an expression of idealism: if I succeed, I will benefit people all over the world. although
If I am frustrated, I will lead an honest and clean life, and I will never go along with the corrupt forces. The so-called "immunity" is here.
It means "poor and disloyal", not "carefree travel"; It is "cultivate one's morality and put one's family in the world", but never.
It is "born". The second half of this sentence does not have the rare confused and cynical attitude advocated by Taoism.
Taoism advocates "letting nature take its course" and treats the world with the attitude of "carefree travel", "don't blame right and wrong, live with the world."
Vulgar place ",dissolve all contradictions into nothingness, dissolve in Zhuang Sheng Meng death, Zhuang Sheng Meng death, specious,
In paradoxical metaphysical terms, this is by no means the same as "being immune to it".
In short, if this sentence is the original meaning, it reflects Confucian idealism; If it is removed,
Its ideal color and its whole sentence reflect the cynicism of Taoism. But in either case, let's talk about the first half.
But the second half of idealism is cynicism (positive view is called "realism"), which seems to be difficult to establish.
However, in the reality of the authoritarian era, although these two meanings are not different, they can be
It can be an external and internal difference: if the oral confession of "success will benefit the people of the world" is unsuccessful, you will live a clean and honest life.
Corruption. In fact, it often becomes "hegemony if you get power, and servile if you lose power." "verbal
Idealism, behavioral power and cynicism. So that after more than two thousand years, I was "immune".
This idiom refers to a "penniless" person who changed from Mencius to Zhu.
Mr. Qing Zi's comic color is "a wise man who knows what he can't do and is immune to it"! lack of evidence
Confucianism, which has been called "exclusion" for more than two thousand years, has been squeezed by "official Confucianism" and "neo-Confucianism"
, is not "Confucianism" or "Confucianism", where there is no real Confucianism?
two
Then, as far as its original meaning is concerned, "if you are rich, you will help the world, and if you are poor, you will be immune to it"; As an intellectual,
What are the defects of his ideal personality? Can its distortion and Taoism be avoided?
Undoubtedly, the ideal ambition of "saving the world" and the personal accomplishment of "keeping in good health" are very worth pursuing.
Yes However, there are problems with "reaching is the best" and "being poor is the best", and it is no accident that they are distorted.
The key is that the phrase "help the world" is a bit like "don't do to others what you don't want others to do to you".
It embodies the spirit of moral law, but does not consider the principles of limitation, self-discipline and obedience of power. This side of the Atlantic
In fact, Confucius has long said: "Self-denial and self-respect, the world is benevolent." He said "self-denial"
Not Croat, really! Self-denial is good, self-denial is false, and self-denial is called self-denial.
Especially fake, especially evil, especially ugly. If we can achieve the same result, it is "Wang must grow in the meantime", and in the name of economic interests, it will harm the world. "
In the name of taking acupuncture points, the way to defeat is ","so that people all over the world dare not be selfish, dare not be selfish, and take my personal interests as the sky. " "
The next Grand Duke. ""I am benevolent ",Buddhism and Taoism complement each other. Therefore, to be true, you must stop it first.
A man who is a man-this son is silent, a man who dares to make up words.
Therefore, for a "capable person", his first consideration is "he is immune to it."
"Good health" is everyone's duty, but it is he who is good for "capable people".
What must be done. Not only should he do it himself, but more importantly, others and the public should also supervise power and control.
The institutional arrangement of checking and balancing power and restraining power helped him to do this. In modern civilized society, including
Public figures, including those in power, have less privacy than ordinary citizens. Like the media.
Speculation about the "scandal" of Clinton and Lewinsky constitutes an invasion of privacy for ordinary people, but
For the president, even if the media exaggerates, what can you do to safeguard civil rights and the modern judicial system?
The principle of "presumption of innocence" must be implemented, and the judicial authorities must bear the responsibility of proving guilt. If you can't prove it,
If you are guilty, then you are considered innocent. In order to restrain power, the supervision of public opinion on "Da" is actually
The principle of "presumption of error" is implemented, and the "at most" person bears the burden of proof without error. If you can't prove yourself,
There is nothing wrong, then you are wrong. Isn't this "the search for truth is immune"?
As for "saving the world", Mencius' original words are "saving the world", which naturally includes "making good use of it"
Body "and" being kind to others ". But Confucius put it well here: he said, "Don't do to others what you don't want others to do to you.
Don't do to others what you don't want them to do to you "; Instead of saying "do to others what you want." Of course, Confucius also said, "Fu Ren"
Those who want to stand up, want to reach and reach people. "As a person in charge of public power, we should" do what we want to do.
The ideal of "saving the world" and the plan of governing the country are naturally "applied to people" in order to realize the ambition of "saving the world". but
Establishing a person, mastering a person, giving to others and even helping the world are all conditional, that is, being established and being achieved.
Authorized consent of "world" citizens. Do what you want to do and what others want to do, then do it. Do what you want.
Do you want me to do something I don't want to do, or do you want me to do something I don't want to do? I don't want to do this.
Man, where is the sacred road! As the saying goes, don't do to others what you don't want them to do to you. If you can't do it yourself, you can't do it yourself.
If you are strong, you will help the world first. In other words, "Don't do to others what you don't want them to do to you"; This is absolute.
And "don't do to others what you don't want others to do to you" is relative; There are conditions for "helping the world" and "being alone".
Unconditional Therefore, we should advocate that "reaching is the only way to be immune".
When you are in power, you should pay special attention to the self-discipline of power, not dependence.
Power rules the people without limit with its sincere ideals. We should pay attention to the strong versus the weak here.
People's "inaction" and power's "inaction" pay attention to a little tolerance and freedom in rights, and never borrow "concurrently"
In the name of "economy", it should be remembered that no matter how noble a person is, his power must also be limited; and
The rights of mediocre people should also be guaranteed. Only in this way can we truly achieve "inaction" in a positive sense.
Doing nothing really brings happiness to the whole world.
three
As for "being poor is immune", its defect is that it only emphasizes the moral self-discipline of the powerless without testing it.
Considering the need to strive for and safeguard the "rights of the powerless". People may think that such rights are only about individuals.
. In the developed modern civil society, it may not be a big problem to think so, because civil rights have been guaranteed.
Obstacles, they have the right to care about and participate in public affairs, but society has no right to ask them to do so.
To "help the world."
However, if the rights have not been won, the situation is different from keeping the existing rights from being lost.
Originally, "planned economy" needs profound "science" to provide artificial "optimal solution" for economic process.
The free economy only requires not to "steal" or "grab", and fair trade will "let nature take its course"; "ideal
Politics requires everyone to be a sage, while liberal politicians only need to ask people not to commit crimes. In short, "freedom"
The original low-key "ism" admits that everyone has the right to be selfish. On the other hand, however, "
Freedom itself is the most "public good". Someone won it through hard work.
A sum of money cannot be shared by others; The fame and honor gained through hard work cannot be shared by others; even
After the bloodshed, others can't get their hands on it. Only "freedom", once realized.
Is highly open * * *, someone died for the free system, so all the people are here.
Freedom is "free enjoyment" in the system; If this person is not happy about it, he wants to enjoy it more than others.
"Freedom" (or conversely, asking others to enjoy "freedom" less), then this requirement itself is destroyed.
What he wants to win. If this person sees this from the beginning, ask everyone to be like him.
If he paid the price for freedom, then he destroyed liberalism from the beginning-that's why.
The foundation of socialism is to respect individual choice and admit rational self-interest. Therefore, liberalism will fall into the hands of westerners.
The so-called "hitchhiking" and the so-called "three monks have no water to eat" dilemma. It should be said that in most cases
On most occasions, liberalism is faced with this "behavioral dilemma" rather than a "cultural dilemma"
.
Obviously, to get out of this dilemma, people must face not theoretical problems, but practical problems:
Theoretically speaking, while one is fighting for his own human rights, he is also fighting for the rights of all people. in other words
In other words, he is "helping the world", not "fighting alone". But the price of doing so, but
It was his own fault. On the other hand, if others do this, they may gain power for nothing.
Li. Therefore, in the face of the oppression of power, if people are selfish and silent, they will not be able to break through the oppression and realize it.
Freedom. Therefore, "negative" freedom must be fought for with a positive attitude, and a low-key system must be high-profile
Adjusting personality to create, in order to realize a society that recognizes everyone's selfish rights, must pay.
The era of selfless sacrifice and struggle for secular liberalism needs a kind of "martyrdom" essence that transcends the secular.
Jesus Christ. And this is much more important than the theoretical liberal system construction. In other words, if you have no power or influence,
In other words, without a "poor" person to "help the world with the spirit of self-sacrifice", it will be very difficult for all people.
Be immune to it. "
Many nationalities have such people in their struggle for freedom, such as Gandhi, Javier and Mandela.
. They have not made much contribution to liberalism in theory, and even their own ideas may not be justified.
It is "liberalism". However, their contribution to freedom is unparalleled, and the reason is not their own.
In their behavior: first, they dare to erect the banner of justice in the face of oppression and resist tyranny instead of just being immune.
",thus jumping out of the paradox of" negative freedom "; Second, they tolerate the world and don't do whatever they want.
People are morally autocratic, and they don't think they have the right to enjoy more freedom than others, thus jumping out of the "product"
The trap of extreme freedom. It should be said that whether a nation is free does not depend on whether it is free.
Theorists, but depends on whether it has such a free practitioner. Even if we can't write Rawls, huh?
For Yerke's theoretical masterpieces, we can also implement "takenism"; But if we can't,
What Gandhi, Javier and others have done will never be replaced by others.
Therefore, "saving the world" should be another principle of ideal personality. If this principle is
The era of freedom may not be important-at that time, what people need more is a saint who limits "achieving the best and helping the world"
. But in the era of fighting for freedom, there can be no hero who "helps the world if he is poor". When they do nothing.
When the powerful people are "poor", there is naturally no abuse of power. If they become successful in the future.
That is the problem of "reaching out and being immune". At the same time, we can practice that "poverty is the best in the world and success is the best in the world."
A person whose body "has a heroic personality". Mahatma, higher than sage, because the latter if "
Do to others what you don't want others to do to you "will be alienated into a tyrant. If the sage is poor, it is higher than the sage, because if the latter
It's just "knowing what not to do" is just cynicism. And saints, poor is the world, know it.
If you can't do it, you must do it for yourself at a price you don't want. Not just "Don't do to others what you don't want them to do to you"! Be at a loss
Immune to yourself, ask others for what you want, and then give it to the world. It's really called "the behavior of the avenue"
. The personality of a saint is the best saint. China advocates the state of sages, the virtue of propriety and righteousness, and what Confucianism cherishes is the virtue of benevolence.
Heart, will not let its beauty monopolize India, the west and South Africa.
four
In a word, the Confucian moral ideal can be "saving the world" or "preserving health"
Combine the principles of modern human rights, freedom and democracy. Only by combining these principles, "auspicious days"
Only by "going down" and "being in good health" can it be truly realized. The basis of this combination is that "the poor will help the world, and the rich will help the world."
You are immune to it. "If the' poor people' are more heroic in saving the world, then they can' serve'.
My grand duke won the self-interest of the world and realized the sage's way of "benefiting others and benefiting himself", such as
If "big" is more bound by the holy king system, it will eliminate "taking me as big"
The Millennium scourge of "being private is the greatest duke in the world" has truly realized "self-denial and reciprocity, and the world is benevolent." So we ...
The "poor" should be made more aware of their rights, while the "advanced" should be less superstitious about their rights. "Poor people" should be able to
Enough to "do something without doing anything", and those who "do something" should be good at "doing nothing without doing anything". Only in this way can we have it.
Only an ancient civilization can jump out of the strange circle of "complementary law and Taoism", because "reaching is good, doing nothing is poor", Confucianism
Learning itself can get rid of the double alienation of Confucianism and Taoism and resist power philosophy and dogs.
Confucianism and philosophy are attacked from both sides, and it is possible that "the old sage will make a new king." The Development of Modern Civilization in China
Only in this way can there be a bottom line: from this foundation can we pursue Confucian sages.
Moral perfection and the ideal of serving the world public, the pursuit of western liberalism, freedom, human rights and the rule of law, the pursuit of this.
In the past, socialist democracy and fairness and the ideal of free association-of course, only in this way.
On the basis of the bottom line, we can further discuss the differences between Chinese and western "culture" and left and right "ism"
No, and it can reflect the "cultural" choice and "socialist" choice of our personality. Not here "
Wild talk about the advantages and disadvantages of a "civilization" and b "civilization" in a barbaric environment; Be in a state of "subject without meaning"
Let's talk about the difference between A "ism" and B "ism". In short, no matter the differences between Chinese and western "cultures" or
The difference between left and right "ism" must be based on basic human nature. Above "China and the West" and "Left and Right"
There is another more important difference between humanity and anti-humanity. We in China have a long history and culture.
Make your own contribution on the basis of human civilization.