论“可久可大可新”之作为“中华共识”——“华学道德说”之辨析与批评

On "to be Permanent,to be Great, and to be Innovative" as the "Chinese Consensus"

仅视"中华文化"为"道德文化",是片面的。"中华文化"有"道德"之一面,但并非仅为"道德文化"。倡导"道德文化"者,以儒家为主;此外又有释家,倡导"智慧文化";尚有道家与道教,倡导"身体文化"。儒、释、道三家有共同目标,曰"可久可大可新"。各家各派之别,乃路径之别,非目标之别。儒家以为达成"可久可大可新"之路径,主要在"德修"或"修性";释家以为达成"可久可大可新"之路径,主要在"智修"或"修心";道家与道教以为达成"可久可大可新"之路径,主要在"体修"或"修命"。路径不同,乃"术"之异;目标相同,乃"道"之同。"中华文化"即此"道同而术异"之文化体系,非仅为"道德文化"也。

It is a lopsided view that the “Chinese culture” can be seen as a mere “moral culture”, the one which belittles and defaces the “Chinese culture.” The “Chinese culture” has an aspect of “morality,” but it is more than a “moral culture.” It is Confucians who advocate the “moral culture” in Chinese culture. In addition, there are Taoists who advocate the “physical culture” and (Chinese) Buddhists who advocate the “sapiential culture.” The Confucianism,(Chinese) Buddhism and Taoism have a common goal, i.e.“to be permanent, to be great, and to be innovative.” The differences among the three distinct schools lie in their distinct approaches, rather than their own goals. According to Confucianism, the approach to realizing the goal “to be permanent, to be great, and to be innovative” mainly focuses on “cultivation of virtue” or “cultivating the ethical nature.” According to Buddhism, it focuses on “cultivation of wisdom” or “cultivating the mind with wisdom.” According to Taoist school or Daoism, it focuses on “physical cultivation” or “cultivating the vital life.” The differences among approaches are functional while the sameness of the goal is essential. The “Chinese culture” is a cultural system “with the same essence and different functions” rather than no more than a “moral culture.”