Mr. Qian Mu: Huishi and Gongsun Long

Editor's Note

This article is selected from Mr. Qian Mu's History of Chinese Thought. Excerpts are hereby taken for the benefit of the reader.

At the same time, Zhuangzi had a close friend Huishi. But the two have absolutely different ideological attitudes. Zhuangzi is similar to Confucius, and his ideas come from the experience of actual life. Huishi is similar to Mozi, and his thoughts are all from speculative theory.

Mojia thought, quite similar to the logical method of Western philosophers, Huishi even elaborated on this aspect, at that time it was called "debater", and was regarded as "famous" in later generations. Later zhuangzi had Gongsun Long, who was also a famous representative of the "famous masters".

Zhuangzi likes to talk about All-That-Is, and Huishi also likes to talk about All-That-Is, but the two speak differently. Zhuangzi said:

Since its different people see it, the liver and gallbladder are more and more. From the perspective of the same, all things are one. (Zhuangzi De Chong Fu)

Also known:

False to foreign body, supported by homology. (Grand Master Zhuangzi)

It can be seen that Zhuangzi's theory of the unity of all things is an on-the-spot observation of external events and a deep analysis of the understanding of human mood. Huishi said:

The greatest is the greatest, the greatest, and the smallest, the smallest, the smallest. (Zhuangzi Tianxia)

The same is the same as the small, which is said to be the same as the small; all things are the same, and this is said to be very similar. (Zhuangzi Tianxia)

Universal love for all things, heaven and earth are one. (Zhuangzi Tianxia)

It can be seen that Huishi's so-called All-That-Is is the inevitable result of the analysis of famous sayings and the extension of the meaning of human language. In fact, the names of human language do not correspond exactly to the human mood.

If the name of the language is infinitely extended, it is easy to contradict the original mood of human beings. Therefore, Zhuangzi is not, calling it:

The heart of the ornament, the meaning of the easy, the mouth that can overcome the people, the heart that cannot convince the people, the defender's confinement. (Zhuangzi Tianxia)

Zhuangzi and Keiko swim on top of Haoliang, and Zhuangzi said: "The catfish swims calmly, it is the fish music." "

Keiko said, "Son is not a fish, and the joy of knowing fish?" "Modern Western idealistic philosophy is said to be mindful of things, so it cannot know things.

Zhuang Zi said: "The son is not me, and I know that I do not know the joy of fish?" "To break the language is to attack the shield of the Son with the spear of the Son." This is a shallow drama.

Keiko said, "I am not a son, I don't know the son, the son is not a fish, and the son doesn't know the joy of the fish." "

Zhuang Zi said, "Please follow the basics." This beginning is not about language, but about the actual experience of mood and perception, which is for a deeper level of righteousness. From the origin of knowledge. Zi Yue "Ru'an ZhiYu Le" Cloud Man, I know what I know, and ask me, I know it. "

If I had known in my heart that there was something outside, I would not have had to ask him how he knew. (Zhuangzi Qiushui)

The defense in this section can just illustrate the fundamental differences in the ideological attitudes of Zhuang and Hui. Huishi always likes to think about the name and argument, so he says "Zi is not a fish, anzhi fish is happy", and Zhuangzi understands directly from the actual experience of the heart, so he says "I know the haoshang".

Zhuangzi was on top of the haoliang, personally saw the catfish swimming calmly, and felt the joy of the fish from his heart.

Huishi said, "Zi is not a fish, but the joy of knowing the fish?" Isn't this a concrete example of "the heart of the adorned, the meaning of changing people, the mouth of the victory of the people, and the heart of the unconvinced"? Moreover, Huishi asked Zhuangzi: "Ru'an knows the joy of fish", then knowing that Zhuangzi knows the joy of fish, he asks questions, which is already contradictory.

Guo Xiang once defended on behalf of Zhuangzi, and Yun "If You are not me, how can you know that I am not a fish", which is also reasonable. In short, from the analysis of human language names, too finely extended and extended, the result is often prone to this disease.

After Huishi, there was Gongsun Long, who was on a par with Huishi. Their ideas are all based on the argument of the name. Huishi likes to say that the different are the same, but Gongsun Long likes to say that the same is different. He likes to talk about "white horses not horses" the most. He said:

Ask for horses, yellow and black horses can be caused. Ask for white horses, yellow and black horses can not be caused. To make the white horse a horse is also the one that is sought. The one that is sought, and the yellow and black horses, there is no possibility, why not? Ask for horses, then yellow and black horses can be caused.

If you ask for a white horse, the yellow and black horses cannot be seen, and it can be proved that what is sought is not one. Therefore, the yellow and black horses are also one, and there should be horses, not white horses, and white horses are not horses. (Gongsun Longzi White Horse Theory)

In fact, Gongsun Long's discernment is also based on Western nomenclature. The British Mueller made a famous study, and tried to distinguish between "thing names" and not "meaning names". Gongsun Longshi is a "meaning name" theorist. If you ask the white horse for the heart of the white horse, the white horse is not a horse. The object name is objective and deducible.

The meaning of the name is subjective and cannot be deduced. In the science of nomenclature, there is a difference between inner bag and extension. The inner bag is the master of what it contains, then the white horse is not a horse. If the Lord of Extension lifts his deeds, the white horse is a horse. The reasoning of the name is extended, and Gongsun Long changes the connotation, and the reason is different. Gongsun Long also said:

Things can not be referred to, but not to refer to. (Gongsun Longzi refers to the theory of matter)

All things are named by the human mind. If no one's mind means it, it is not worth it at all. But what the human mind refers to is different. What this person refers to is not necessarily what the other person refers to. What is meant at this moment is not necessarily what it refers to.

Then this refers to the other, so it is said that "refers to the non-referent". If so, not only is the white horse not a horse, but also the white horse is not a white horse. Therefore, Gongsun Long also said that he was "away from Jianbai". He said:

Whoever does not see what he is firm in, but who has what he is white, has no firmness. Those who cannot be white and have what they are firm in, there is no whiteness. (Gongsun Longzi Jianbai Theory)

Look at the stone, get its whiteness, not its strength. The stone of the hand is firm, and it is not white. The weight of the stone refers to "white". The scale of the stone refers to the "firm" term. The name is the same but refers to the difference. So Gongsun Long had his "theory of nominal reality" again. He said:

Name, actually also. To know this is not to be this, to know that this is not here, is not to say also. Knowing that the other is not the other, and knowing that the other is not in the other, is not also the same.

So the other stops at the other, and this stops here. (Gongsun Longzi Nominal Theory)

For example, if you look at the stone, it actually means the whiteness of the stone. Hand-picked stone, which means the strength of the stone. The sight of the stone is not really strong. The hand-picked stone is not really white. If so, within one of the names of "stone", it is not both strong and white.

Therefore, Gongsun Long advocated "leaving" and advocating "stopping without pushing". At first glance, this statement is close to Zhuangzi's so-called "cause is already" theory. Although Gongsun Long belonged to a famous family, he completely overturned the basic theory of reasoning based on names. But Zhuangzi would never like Gongsun Long's set, and now Zhuangzi strongly rebukes Gongsun Long's.

It is not Zhuangzi's handwriting, but Zhuangzi's later learning. Because of the Gongsun Dragon theory, it is still based on the name dialect to overthrow the name dialect. Zhuangzi's thought did not start from the name dialect at all, and it did not erase the use of name discernment too much, as Gongsun Long did, so Zhuangzi said:

So the fish is in the fish, and the fish is forgotten. The hoofer is therefore in the rabbit, and the rabbit forgets the hoof. The speaker cares, and the one who is proud of it forgets to speak. I'm andyph's forgetting to talk to the man who talks! (Zhuangzi exterior)

He added:

The book is not exhaustive, the words are not enough.

Words are born of intention, and what words represent is intention, but words often fail to fulfill their intentions. We are in this unsatisfactory word to find out what it represents, but it is the unfinished meaning of its words.

Gongsun Long seems to think that words are intentional, and the meaning is exhausted, and if it is, it is inevitable that he will die under the words, and he will be frustrated by the words. His words, of course, are still as enough to convince the mouth of man, not enough to convince the heart.

From the perspective of ideological context, the pre-Qin masters actually changed from ink learning. The Mo family lord "also loves", and its theoretical basis is in "Tianzhi". Is there a heavenly emperor with a personality and a man with his ambition? This is not easy to recognize in traditional Chinese thought.

Huishi began to change his argument, saying that "heaven and earth are one, universal love for all things", no longer saying that there is God's will, but wanting to support Mo Yi from the analysis of the similarities and differences of famous sayings, to teach people to love and love, and undoubtedly it is inevitable to fail. But its positive contribution to the formation of ink righteousness is undeniable.

Gongsun Long advocates the theory of "white horse not horse", but he interprets Mo Yi from the negative side. Because the Mo family advocates both love, in practice, there are also difficulties. The essay says:

Thieves, people also. Many thieves are not many people, and no thieves are not no one. There are many thieves in evil, many people who are not evil, no thieves who want to steal, and many who do not want to be thief. Love thieves, non-lovers also. Kill thieves, not kill people also.

Stealing is not a person, killing a thief is not killing, and there is no intention of betraying and loving people, which is obviously the meaning of Gongsun Long's white horse non-horse theory, and it is applied to the truth. However, whether it is pushing the will of God like Mozi, or analyzing famous sayings like Huishi and Gongsun Long, to distinguish between positive and negative, these two paths have been fiercely attacked in the pre-Qin ideological circles.

This is a methodological attack on thought. Doing their best here is the Zhuangzi Taoists. Although the mo family's love is a big theory, on the one hand, it cannot withstand Zhuangzi's criticism of ideological methods; on the other hand, it cannot resist Mencius's propositions in the practice of life. As a result, the ink science that flourished for a while was only becoming more and more depressed.

Welcome to pay attention to the "Read Qianmu" WeChat public account.