|
|
|
| On Mencius’ Virtue Cultivation |
| KUANG Zhao |
| Social Sciences in China Press, Beijing, 100026 |
|
|
|
|
Abstract Mencius’ exploration of human nature and discovery of virtue cultivation approaches made early Confucian thought rich and complete. Mencius used a series of roughly equivalent terms for virtue cultivation approaches, such as “cunxin (存心，retaining innate goodness) ” , “qiu fangxin ( 求放心，finding lost innate goodness)”, and “yangxin (养心，nourishing the mind). As for “yangxin”, Mencius first clearly related it to “guayu (寡欲，reducing desires). This is relevant to his differentiation between “qiu zai wo zhe (求在我者，pursuit of what is inside ourselves)” and “qiu zai wai zhe (求在外者，pursuit of what is outside ourselves)”. Human desires are “qiu wu yi yu de (求无益于得者，what our efforts do not help get as they are outside ourselves)”. We need to restrain our desires by means of negative approaches in virtue cultivation. In Mencius’ opinion, the purpose of “yangxin” is nothing more than showing “liangxin (良心，innate goodness), and not allowing it to be affected by external factors or inner desires. This kind of mental state Mencius called “bu dong xin (不动心，not wavering in the heart)”. To reach this state, one need to take the approach of “zhiyan yangqi (知言养气，understanding words and cultivating virtues)”. This is the most important part in Mencius’ understanding of virtue cultivation. It can be taken as a parallel development of the two cultivation approaches, “zhiyan’, “jiyi (集义，promoting righteousness)” and “yangqi”. Mencius’ argument of “zhitian (知天, knowing one’s destiny) ” and “shitian (事天, following one’s destiny) ” suggests that we can only achieve perfect human nature by way of virtue cultivation on the premise that we understand nature and human follow its own law. We need to draw a clear line between virtue cultivation and destiny as the former depends on ourselves while the latter does not.
|
|
Received: 30 March 2016
|
|
|
|
|
|
[1] 匡钊.孔子对儒家“为己之学”的奠基[J].深圳大学学报,2012,（6）.
[2] 匡钊.简书《性自命出》中“道四术”探析[J].江汉论坛,2012,（7）.
[3] 白奚.稷下学研究——中国古代的思想自由与百家争鸣[M].北京：三联书店,1998.
[4] 冯友兰.中国哲学史新编（第二册）[M].北京：人民出版社,1995.
[5] 劳思光.新编中国哲学史（一卷）[M].桂林：广西师范大学出版社,2005.
[6] Cf. The Cambridge Companion to Foucault, edited by Gary Gutting, Cambridge University Press, 1994. 5. Arnold I. Davidson: Ethics as ascetics: Foucault, the history of ethics, and ancient thought.
[7] Martha C. Nussbaum: The Therapy of Desire: Theory and Practice in Hellenistic Ethics, Princeton University Press,1994, p. 359.
[8] Pierre Hadot: Philosophy as a Way of Life - Spiritual Exercises from Socrates to Foucault, English edition. translated by Michael Chase. Blackwell Publishers Ltd.,1995.
[9] 匡钊.早期儒家的德目划分[J].哲学研究,2014,（7）.
[10] 李景林.教养的本原——哲学突破期的儒家心性论[M].沈阳：辽宁人民出版社,1998.279.
[11] 杜正胜.形体、精气与魂魄：中国传统对“人”认识的形成[A].黄应贵.人观、意义与社会[C].中央研究院民族学研究所,1993.45.
[12] 张岱年.管子书中的哲学范畴[J].管子学刊,1991,（3）.
[13] 徐复观.中国人性论史[J].华东师范大学出版社,2005.106.
[14] 陈鼓应注译.黄帝四经今注今译——马王堆汉墓出土帛书[M].北京：商务印书馆,2007.218.
[15] 黄俊杰.中国孟学诠释史论[M].北京：社会科学文献出版社,2004.221.
[16] 杨儒宾.儒家身体观[M].台北：中央研究院中国文哲研究所,2004. |
|
|
|
2016, Vol. 33 
