requestId:68499aba2e4c31.00666530.
Repel Qin Zheng: The Intrinsic of Going to Republic comes from
Author: Tang Wenming
Source: Author Author Authorized Confucian Network, Originally published by “Literature, History and Philosophy” No. 4, 2018
Time: Confucius was the 12th month of the 12th month of the 12th month of the 2569th year of the 12th month of the 12th month of the 12th month of the 12th month of the 12th month of the 20th month of the 12th month of the 20th month of the 20th month of the 12th month of the 20th month of the 20th month of the 20th month of the 12th month of the 20th month of the 20th month of the 20th month of the 20th month of the 20th month of the 20th month of the 20th month of the 20th month of the 20th month of the 20th month of the 20th month of the 20th month of the 20th month of the 20th month of the 20th month of the 20th month of the 20th month of the 20th month of the 20th month of the 20th month of the 20th month of the 20th month of the 20th month of the 20th month of the 20th month of the 20th month of the 20th month of the 20th month of the 20th month of the 20th month of the 20th month of the 20th month of the 20th month of the 20th month of the 20th month of the 20th month of the 20th month of the 20th month Jesus August 22, 2018
From a later perspective, the political manifestation of the great changes that China suffered in the late Qing Dynasty was from a monarchy to a republic.
The late Qing scholars had a major internal reason for the acceptance of the republic, that is, the criticism of the monarchy since the Qin Dynasty based on a certain fantasy model of political and religious affairs in traditional thinking. [1]
The criticism of Qin Zheng relates to the evaluation and engraving of the entire history of China, and behind it is a historical philosophy problem that affects and involves extremely large, which is most important for us to understand the basic direction of modern Chinese thinking.
The fantasy political and religious models in traditional thinking have three different types, all from the holy king’s affairs in modern classics.
Since the criticism of Qin Zheng is different, regardless of the fantasy political and religious model, then when criticism develops in a specific language, criticism will lead to a call for change, but for the purpose and the longevity of the reform, there will be great differences due to the differences between the political and religious model they rely on.
The most representative of the three differences is to criticize Qin Zheng based on the three representatives’ ideas.
More specifically, this historical philosophy from Confucianism believes that the Three Dynasties are a worthy and practical model of politics and religion. The most basic problem below the Three Dynasties lies in the Qin government, which is characterized by the whole country as the private property of the monarch and the “respecting the king and humble ministers”.
The real correlation of this criticism lies in that since the Qin government has not undergone the most basic changes in the later history, and it is said that “all generations of Qin government have been implemented”, then the destruction of Qin government is a just reason for the current changes.
From the existing literature, we are not difficult to see that the late monarchs often argued about the contrast between the three generations and the Qin system when they proposed their initiatives.
As Wang Wei said in his article “Change Method” published in 1874: “The whole country changed in ancient times and became the medieval age. The whole country changed in medieval age and became three generations. From the ancestor LongtuIt started, and the whole country was annexed, and it was a feudal county, burned books and buried scholars. The three dynasties of the ceremony were lost, and there was no one left. The whole country has changed again in this way. ”[2]
The meaning is that the political system established by the transformation of Zhou and Qin has been extended to this day, which is the origin of the problems existing in China at present, and it is an internal source of the transformation method.
So, for the preface written by Song Yuren for Chen Yu’s book “Yong Book” published in 1893: “The foundation of China’s thousands of years was established in Shun, integrated in Confucius, and the politics of the previous kings was prepared in Confucius’ books, and was produced for thousands of years. The way of the Qin Dynasty was to fool the officials of Guizhou and Li. Although Han has been doing some work and the political rules have been established, no doctoral students dare to be corrected. 大官网大官网大官网网站大官网网站网站站站站站站站站站站站站站站站站站站站站站站站站站站站站站站站站站站站站站站站站站站站站站站站站站� He can destroy his intentions by engaging in his books, and his learning will become more reckless and broken. In his administration, he abandoned his skills and learned from officials and clerks. Those who are in power can see what they are capable of, and then he abandoned the scholars and used the market. ”[3]
This is not only the “The Way of the Kings of Qin” as understandingBaobao.com ReviewA year-round relationship of the changes in national history, and it clearly pointed out that although the Han Dynasty “revised a little”, there was no basic change. It also pointed out that it was far away and aimed at facing the current situation and promoting the transformation.
In the comparison between the Three Dynasties and the Qin government, Chinese history is engraved. This view shows that it has its own origins. In the Qing Dynasty, representative commentary was first recommended as the Ming Dynasty’s common Huang Zongxi.
In “Mingyi Waiting to Visit”, Huang Zongxi discussed what he said in this way: “The changes in ancient and modern times came to Qin and reached Yuan and another. After these two things, the ancient sage kings loved people and the entrepreneurs were relieved. They thought and looked deeper, and changed one by one, and reverted to the well fields, feudalism, school, and old school. Although they changed a little, they were always close to each other. ”[4]
In Huang Zongxi’s view, compared with the ancient sage kings of the whole country who “loved people and operated”, the monarchs since the Qin Dynasty regarded the whole country as their own private property. This is a major part of understanding the history of China.
The key point here is not only the political and religious scriptures that use the three generations as fantasy The model is also to deny that any era after Qin could be comparable to the three generations in its most basic quality. It also further believes that the Zhiyuan has a tendency to decline every time, so it is a very critical view, or as public rights say, “Lizhou deeply understands that the three generations are not well-managed, and believes that the monarch has unclear duties and the whole country is private, which is its last consequence. Since Qin and Han, the bad of the system,This is the cause of the disease. ”[5]
In terms of the more remote thinking source, Huang Zongxi’s views came from the Confucian Confucians of Song.
The Confucians of Song had a broad idea of returning to the three dynasties, taking the three dynasties as practical and feasible and visible political and religious fantasies, and believed that the era after the Qin Dynasty—including Han and Tang— could not be compared with the three dynasties in its most basic nature, so that Wei Yuan once said based on his sensitive observation, “BaohuanetSong Confucians talked about the three generations”. [6]
Why did the Song Confucians talk about the three generations? This is a fun-worthy question. You must have the excitement related to the rise of science to gain a proper and sufficient understanding.
As we know, the Three Dynasties were established as examples of politics and religion in Confucius. In the history of China after Qin, the re-advocacy of the Three Dynasties often appeared in the era when the court loved Confucianism.
Before the Song Dynasty, the most classic example could be when Emperor Wu of Han, when Mo Mu once said in a comprehensive manner: “When the Han court scholars came to Emperor Wu, they discussed the Tang and Yu dynasties, and deeply rejected the destruction of Qin. ”[7]
The Song Dynasty also marked the title of “governing the country with Confucianism”, so there was a saying that “the emperor and scholars and officials governed the country together”, so the three dynasties were once again strongly advocated as political and religious fantasies.
In the ideological structure of science, the advocacy of the three dynasties was established by Cheng Jun. Cheng Jun once said: “The rule of the three dynasties is smooth, and the two below all control the whole country. ”[8] This completely separates the history of Han and the three dynasties.
He also said: “It must have the meaning of “Guanju” and “Linzhi”, and then the French style of “Zhou Guan”. ”[9] This is actually an application for the political and educational order of self-culti
發佈留言