Confucianism was founded by the ancient Chinese philosopher and educator Confucius around 500BC. The core teaching is about cultivation of virtue and moral of the individual.
After the influence of Taoism and Buddhism around Song Dynasty, a new branch of Confucianism was found: Neo-Confucianism. The key element of Neo-Confucianism is that they beleive universe could be understood through human reason, a harmonious relationship between the universe and the individual can be cultivated.
Around early 20th century and after post-Mao era, another new school of Confucianism was found: New Confucianism. It is a political, ethical, and social philosophy using metaphysical ideas adopted from both Western Philosophy and ancient Confucianism.
Lately, there is a scholar who proposed "Post-New-Confucianism" which based on the foundation of adopting concepts from both New-Confucianism and Marxism.
I guess very soon, a "Confucianism 4.0" might be surfaced by some other scholars.
It is not a bad idea to adopt Confucianism and tailor it to suit contemporary suitation. However, the evolved Confucianism teachings seem to be getting further and further away from the original teachings by Confucius.
To what extent should we keep to the ancient teachings? Should we continue to evolve Confucianism by adopting contemporary teachings?
Perhaps and first of all should we get some "perfect" translations along with explanations about the possible meanings of each character related to historical contexts and then adapt this philosophy to our present ?
Perhaps we can begin with Simon Leys' (Pierre Ryckmans) translation of 'The Analects of Confucius Translations and Notes" (1997).
Issue with Confucianism is that it is a philosophy and not a religion. It does not have a central body to govern the teachings and official interpretation or translation of the texts. By adopting more and more present thoughts to Confucianism, it could be beneficial to current generation. However, we could also be diverting further away from the original teachings of Confucianism.
When 'philosophy' first erupted around 2500 years ago (+/-) it was widely conceived of as the 'love of wisdom' by those with a strong interest in it. In the 2500 years since we have amassed a mountain of knowledge/data but it is arguable that we are no wiser. Perhaps it's too soon to abandon the ancient teachings.......
In my view, philosophy is about finding the meanings of "being" and "knowledge". It does not consist of any religious ritual. Philosophy focuses on reasons and logic while religion emphasises on faith.
Perhaps we could just refer to the good old I-ching or Book of Changes. I mean the Bollingen Series version of the translation by the German Jesuit Sinologist Richard Wilhem, with a forword form Carl Jung. Wilhelm returned from China to German intellectual circles in the early 1920s.....translating The I-ching (and The Secret of the Golden Flower, based on ancient Chinese meditational psychological states) was his life's work.
We could thereby keep to the ancient views of Tao and harmonious ways of being in the world at all levels..... Confucious himself spent many years studying and making the I-ching easier to understand by his contemporaries, and said if he had another fifty years to live, he would spend them during further work on the "Book of Changes"....
The Analects passage you mention-- in which Confucius says, wistfully, that he wishes to have another fifty years of life so that he might continue to study the Book of Changes-- is famously problematic. Many scholars believe the word Yi (Changes) to be a later interpolation that was put there in order to elevate the status of this book in the eyes of the world. There is no real evidence anywhere that Confucius had anything to do with the Book of Changes or its early appendices and commentaries. To say this does not, of course, detract from the great importance of the Book of Changes as a wisdom text.
Ah, nowhere is there any certainty when the scholars are about....
I wonder if you know of the commentary on the Changes made by the early 12th century Neo-Confucian philosophers Cheng Hao and Cheng Yi (Zhu Xi's teacher), or perhaps it was only one of the two. I know there is an English translation because I have it packed away somewhere but can't remember the name of the translator. The Cheng commentary is interesting in that it tries to make sense of the Book of Changes as a source of secular and social philosophy. I read bits of it after spending several months puzzling over commentaries involving a lot of symbology and numerology, and found its "commonsense" approach-- in which the commentator(s) offer to take much of the Changes at face value instead of searching for an arcane meaning-- greatly refreshing. At the very least, it provides an alternative way of looking at the Changes.
Please, Alice Cheang, try to find the reference of that commentary! Thanks in forward
You may have a look at this book:
"Dao Companion to Neo-Confucian Philosophy" by John Makeham
Go to books.google and you could have a preview of the book:
http://books.google.com/
Hi Alice, are you referring to this book?
I Ching: The Book of Change by Cheng Yi, Thomas Cleary translated
I have read the Thomas Cleary version. Very good too....here's a poem i just wrote... just for the fun of it....
For years and years I threw the coins
Became thoroughly confused
But at least I felt not alone
Slowly I absorbed the Dao of changes
Ceased to fret and groan
Now I quietly let the inner currents flow
Ride the sea-tides
From high to low
And drift back to land again
To listen equably to others'
Tales of laughter
Or their tales of woe...
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Political Science