黄保罗 香港汉语基督教文化研究所，芬兰赫尔辛基大学
Huang, Paulos, Institute of Sino-Chirsitan Studies Hong Kong; University of Helsinki
原文Original
The Great Guoxue in the Light of Global Dialogism
The discussion concerning Guoxue in the contemporary China becomes hotter and hotter, but the definition of the concept remains unclear, and that has led to various confusions.
The term “Guoxue” was born in contrast with “Western Study” (Xixue), but recently Confucianism seems to have been trying to occupy the sole representativity of Guoxue, which has raised many disagreements from different sides. Thus, some people try to enlarge the content of Guoxue to the whole Chinese tradition. However, this still can neither be accepted by most common people nor by scholars. Thus, in the moment of Ji Xianlin’s death, many people have tried to define the so-called Great Guoxue as the study of Chinese 56 nations, which means both Han and other 55 minorities included into the study of Guoxue.
But, I personally believe that the foresaid so-called Great Guoxue cannot reflect the real situation of contemporary Chinese thinking, culture and faith. In fact, no matter what tradition a certain element belongs to, as far as it works and influence powerfully and deeply in China, it should be studied as a part of Chinese Guoxue.
Thus, the real Chinese Great Guoxue should include ”One head, two wings and eight legs”. “One head” is Mr. Deng Sanke, i.e., Dengism (Deng Xiaoping), Three Represents and Scientific Development Concept, which are the reflection of Chinese Special Socialism in the contemporary China, and are in the position of leadership. “Two wings” are Chinese and Foreign elements, which reflect the nationalist thinking of Chinese to divide cultural elements into Chinese and barbarian, orthodox and heresy. “Eight Legs” are Confucianism, Buddhism, Daoism, Folk Religions, Secularism, Scienticism/Rationalism, Christianity, and Muslim and other 55 minorities, etc. This is an independent and open system, which has her own characters and would also like to have dialogues with others so as to keep herself develop continuously.
In the era of global dialogism, the real Great Guoxue should find her place within the world village. First, What can Chinese Great Guoxue contribute to the world? Is it the idea of harmony or that of economic benefit seeking? Is it the excluvist opinion to treat all others as barbarians, or the inclusive idea to consider all others as the brothers of one family under the Sky? Second, in the process of globalization, is there a danger that Chinese Great Guoxue will be deconstructed? How can Chinese Guoxue get rid of the mindedness and to deconstruct the conflicts around herself so as to find a solution to develop? For example, in the Christian-Chinese cultural dialogue, how can the partners get rid of the old way of dualist conflicting thinking, so as to overcome the distrust of considering the other as enemy? Only as the development of Chinese Great Guoxue can be a bless also to others, can she overcome the hostilness and worries from others. Third, the real Great Guoxue has the necessarity to exist and to develop, but she should open herself to have dialogues with others.
As an example, in order to study the position of Chinese Great Guoxue and her relationship with others, I would like to call attention to the French Jesuit Figurists, who studied the Jewsish Original Source of Chinese culture and the Chinese Original Source of Western culture in the 1600-1800 since the period of Emperor Kangxi. A study to this school may find us a potential solution to face the globalization today in the world.
译文Translation
全球对话主义视野中的大国学
“国学”讨论越来越热，但其中的概念内涵混乱、术语界定不清状况非常严重。
“国学”本与“西学”相对而诞生，但在近几年的复兴热潮中，首先，儒家有着逐渐独占“国学”的势头，引起各方的关注。其次，为了消解上述狭隘观点，有人意将国学内涵扩展至所有的中国传统学；但这仍然无法获得大众的认可。第三，随着季羡林先生的去世，兴起了将中国56个民族都包括在内的“大国学”概念；目前有席卷一切的趋势。
可笔者认为，上述“大国学”仍然无法真正代表目前中国的国学，因为中国国学不应该是一个死的传统，而应该能够反映当前中国思想、文化和信仰内容；无论某元素在传统上是否属于中国本身所固有，只要它在今日中国发生重大和深刻的影响，都应该是国学研究的内容。
因此，今日真正的中国大国学应该是“一首两翼八条腿”。“一首”乃中国特色社会主义在当前的体现，即邓三科（邓小平理论、三个代表和科学发展观），“两翼”乃所有中国文化学术元素都可融入中外两翼之中（民族主义潜移默化下的华夷、正统非正统之分），“八条腿”乃儒、佛、道、民间信仰、世俗主义、科学理性主义、基督教、和伊斯兰教等中国55个少数民族及其他未列入上述分类中的元素。这是一个既独立又开放的体系，是既保持自己特色又持续与他者对话从而不断发展自身的体系。
在“全球对话主义”兴盛的时代，真正的大国学需要思考自己在世界全球中的位置。首先，中国的大国学能拿什么来贡献给世界？是和谐概念还是经济利益之上？是“唯我独尊”地将他者都视为“南蛮、北侉、东戎、西狄”，还是“四海之内皆兄弟”的“天下一家”？其次，在全球化席卷世界之际，中国的大国学有否面临被解构的危险？如何走出固步自封？如何将全球都“解构”而使之融入己身之中？比如在基督教与中国文化的对话中，不再动辄以狭隘二元的思维方式来提防“非我族类、其心必异”的老套路。只有使中国国学的兴起成为全世界的祝福时，才不会引起他者的担心和防堵。第三，中国真正的大国学仍然有存在与发展的必要，但它应该是愿意与他者对话的真正的大国学。
作为一个例子，我们有必要再次关注康熙时代法国耶稣会士关于中学西源和西学中源的索隐神学研究，它当能为我们反思全球化时代中国国学的地位及其与他者的关系提供借鉴作用。