This is a thought-provoking topic, and we can't say which is right and which is wrong, but only that we have different positions and different objects of speech, so there will be different statements, or even the opposite. Just as Mencius said "the theory of sexual goodness", Xunzi said "the theory of sexual evil".
Interpreting it in isolation from the context and object of their speech can easily confuse us.
Lao Tzu's "treating the good as the good" is the inevitable requirement of "Taoism and Nature".
Lao Tzu said: "The saint has no heart, takes the heart of the people as his heart, the good are good, the bad are also good, and the virtue is good." Those who believe believe in it, those who do not believe in it, and those who believe in virtue. ”
Lao Tzu is talking about the rule of the sage, and the supreme principle of the rule of the sage is "Tao Law and Nature", which requires the sage to "be able to assist the nature of the people", conform to the wishes of the people, help them freely develop their skills and potential, and make all members of society live in harmony. Therefore, the free will of an individual or group must be subordinated to the requirements of order in society as a whole, and the harmony of the whole society takes precedence over the grievances between individuals.
The Taoist sage does not have a personal choice between likes and dislikes, he is facing the people all over the world, and he takes it as his mission to assist the people to realize their own wishes.
Since there is no difference between good and evil, it means that "how big and small, repay grievances with virtue", the purpose of the rule of the saint is to ask the people of the world to "do everything", so as to achieve self-enrichment, natural harmony, and there should be no conflict of interest between the people, so no matter how big the grudge in the eyes of the world, the saint will repay it with virtue.
Of course, there is, and it depends on whether they can take "the hearts of the people as their hearts," whether they can be with the light and dust with the people, and whether they can "follow the law and nature" and "assist the people."
Therefore, "all saints are children" - how can parents have a grudge against their infants and young children?
Many people think that this is the realm that Lao Tzu has transcended, but in fact, this is the basic requirement of the sage for the Tao. That's why Lao Tzu said, "repay grievances with virtue".
Moreover, "the saint holds the right contract, and does not take responsibility for others, there is virtue, but there is no virtue", the virtuous do things according to the contract, and the unvirtuous act according to the law - the contract is agreed by both parties equally, and the law is unilaterally enforced by the power.
The core of Confucius's "repaying grievances with straightforwardness" is to distinguish between right and wrong, and to resolutely fight back against the evil deeds of wicked people
Confucius's interlocutor is a disciple, which is different from Lao Tzu's object of speech "sage", so Confucius's "direct revenge" has obvious "unofficial occasion" characteristics, and the conversation can be more relaxed and humane. Therefore, when the disciple asked, "What is it like to repay grievances with virtue?" Zi Yue replied directly: "How can you repay virtue? ”
Confucius's original words are very clear: If you want to "repay your grievances with virtue," what should you use to repay your grievances? Therefore, you should respond reciprocally: repay grievances with directness, and repay virtue with virtue. The meaning of Confucius is very clear: they all come to "repay grievances with virtue", that is the "hometown wish" for the corruption of the social atmosphere, and that is the "thief of virtue" - the corrupt person of the social atmosphere.
If we do not analyze it, we will definitely think that Confucius denied Lao Tzu's idea of "repaying grievances with virtue". In fact, it confuses the object of their speech.
The current interpretation of Confucian classics is mostly based on the goodwill of keeping pace with the times to "correct" the true meaning of the ancients.
"'Repaying grievances with virtue' is a Taoist idea, so when asked this question, Confucius did not directly oppose it, but asked rhetorically: 'If kindness is used to repay resentment, then how should those who have kindness to themselves repay it? ’’
Since Confucius said that "resentment and kindness should be repaid with the same attitude", which means "there is no distinction between grievances and grievances", what does it mean to "treat resentment with integrity"?
If it is really "treating resentment with integrity", what is the difference between it and Lao Tzu's "repaying grievances with virtue"?
Confucius advocated a clear distinction between right and wrong, distinguishing between right and wrong, and most disgusted with the good old man of the nostalgic style, Zhu Xi even criticized Lao Tzu and said that "the countryside is still in the human world", and Lao Tzu did not even take into account the "human ethics".
From the perspective of social atmosphere, we really should, as Confucius said, not be accustomed to being a good old man in the "nostalgic style", otherwise who will come and roar when there is injustice in this society? Who will stop bad words and deeds and evil tendencies?
Therefore, "repaying grievances with straightforwardness" is conducive to maintaining the positive guidance of morality on life and society, and playing its role in curbing wrong behaviors or crimes.
The highest concern of "repaying grievances with virtue" and the negative impact of "repaying grievances with straightforwardness".
The positive meaning of "repaying grievances with straightforwardness" has just been said, and now we will discuss its negative effects.
Lao Tzu said that "the right is strange, and the good is the same", there must be "evil" if there is "good", and there must be "evil" when "good" is said, because the same thing, the same sentence, and even the views on mistakes and grievances are often different, when the whole society comes to distinguish "right and wrong, good and evil", and "repays grievances with straightforwardness", "straight" and "good" will be misinterpreted and used by people who have the "right to speak", so they will suppress heresy, intensify contradictions, divide sects, and accumulate new grievances.
At the same time, moral principles can indeed be used for "self-discipline" and are indeed conducive to social harmony. However, the reality is that it is easy to "discipline people" but difficult to "self-discipline", and it is difficult to be strict with others and lenient with oneself. Isn't it a moral judgment that criticizes others by standing on the self-righteous "moral high ground" and flaunting themselves and blaming others?
Moreover, the more we are confronted with conflicts of interest, the more hatred will be perpetuated and intensified by "repaying grievances with direct retribution", and this is true in daily life, and international disputes are no exception.
In fact, whether it is China or a foreign country, when it becomes the norm to respond to violence with violence, repay grievances with grievances, and directly repay grievances, then the "historical cycle rate" will be unavoidable. Hou Jing, the scourge of the party, Israel, and so on are all typical examples of "repaying grievances with straightforwardness."
So Mr. Mao told Mr. Huang Yanpei back then, "We have found a new way, and we can jump out of this cycle rate." This new path is democracy. "Being an official is not an official master, but a public servant of the people, and a public servant will not "repay grievances with a straight voice" with his master, and will not have grievances, where will there be a historical cycle law of retribution for injustice?
"Repaying grievances with virtue" requires qualifications, because it is an inevitable principle derived from the Great Dao
Some people think that "repaying grievances with virtue" also has drawbacks, that is, avoiding contradictions, calming things down, and eventually raising tigers into trouble.
This is due to the lack of understanding of Lao Tzu's ideological propositions. "How much is the size, repay the grievances to virtue" is not a lonely sentence, in front of this sentence is "for nothing, nothing to do, tasteless", followed by "the world's difficulty is easy, the world's great work is fine." It is because the saint is not great in the end, so it can become great. ”
That is to say, a saint who has "rule by inaction" and a saint who has "the difficulty of the world is made easy, and the great work of the world is made in detail", is qualified to "repay grievances and virtue", which is the active decision of the saint of "for the way", rather than passive avoidance and compromise.
And a down-and-out person is not qualified to say "repay grievances with virtue", his survival is a problem, to say that he has the self-confidence and strength to "repay grievances with virtue" to others, it is mostly out of helplessness.
Therefore, the only people who can "repay grievances with virtue" are the leaders of great powers, the elders who are highly anticipated, and the young heroes who have made great achievements.
Many people compare Lao Tzu with Confucius and say: Lao Tzu represents "yin" and "softness", and Confucius represents "yang" and "rigidity", which is inappropriate. Confucius always wants to be a strong man, Lao Tzu is to know that he is strong, and to keep the female and not bully, so there is a "know the male and guard the female", the premise of "weak" is that he must be "strong".
Therefore, "repaying grievances with virtue" is an inevitable principle derived from the philosophy of the Great Dao. Of course, in secular philosophy, ordinary people can also "repay grievances with virtue" within a limited circle, and they can also resolve many unnecessary grievances and disputes.
#Wonderful Pen Creation Challenge##Micro Headline Launch Challenge##头条创作挑战赛#