钟竹林 美国路德神学院
Chung, Paul, Luther Seminary
原文Original
Interpretation and Dialectics of Enlightenment in Cross-cultural Encounter: Matteo Ricci, Confucian Theory of Interpretation and Beyond
Abraham Heschel contends that human life is characterized by existence on the way – striving, waiting, and hoping in a quest for the truth. This idea finds application here in an intellectual journey that investigates tensions between the Enlightenment concept of Western civilization (using the Platonic–Christian analogy of a cave) and East Asian philosophy (using the dream metaphor of the butterfly). In cross-cultural and comparative study of theories of interpretation it is illuminating to compare Plato’s metaphor of the cave and Zhuangzi’s metaphor of the butterfly in his dream experience. The Western dialectic of Enlightenment may be traced from the Platonic view of the human intellectual life journey in the cave toward the illuminating sun outside the cave. In the process of western civilization a theory of interpretation has tended to focus on individual human life and self-care without connection to others and the public sphere. In disenchantment with the world, human reason has become instrumentalized into scientifically promoting a mastery over the world, leading to loss of meaning, ecological devastation, and imprisonment in an iron cage (Max Weber). However, the Eastern concept of enlightenment takes on a different configuration and contour. A theory of interpretation, seen in light of the principle of Tao, is of an analogical, diverse and multidimensional horizon rather than based on an ontological project of self-care (Heidegger). The philosophical Taoist sense of mystery or freedom can be discerned in Confucian development by Zhu Xi.
For the cross-cultural study of interpretation and dialectic of Enlightenment, we will take Matteo Ricci as an example of cross-cultural encounter between western rational thought and Chinese thought by exploring his interpretation of Confucian teaching in view of Confucian theory of interpretation (Zhu Xi and Wang Wang-ming). Ricci’s interpretive strategy of return to the orthodox line of Confucius-Mencius did not befriend Zhu's philosophy of the Principle. Unfortunately, Ricci's critique of Zhu's Confucianism remains incomplete, superficial, and even unqualified. In interfaith or intercultural dialogue, it is essential to evaluate Ricci’s interpretation of Christian narrative and Confucian ethics as we further engage the Confucian contribution to the theory of interpretation. Beyond Ricci’s critique, thus, we shall be concerned with appreciating the Confucian theory of interpretation in dialogue with David’s Tracy’s theory of hermeneutic.
Taking a step further than the Confucian theory of interpretation, we aim to integrate the dominant structure of the episteme built on power and knowledge relations in a social location and to emphasize word-event over the said (the world of text; intra-textuality) toward integrating the dissimilar and alien discourse of the people on the margins. In terms of the critical investigation of the human condition and social location, existential knowledge of the subject matter of the text is expanded and deepened toward God’s (Tao’s) act of weaving narrative into people’s actual lives. In the afterword we will conclude our reflection on interpretation and dialectic of Enlightenment by way of two symbolic figures, The Odyssey and Laozi in trans-cultural context.
译文Translation
跨文化相遇中的释经和启蒙辩证法：利玛窦，儒家释经理论及其他
亚伯拉罕·赫舍尔（Abraham Heschel）认为人类生活是以奋斗、等待、追求真理中的希望等人生存在为特征的。这种观点将会运用在本文的知性旅程中。本文旨在探索西方文明启蒙概念（运用柏拉图式基督教洞穴比喻）与东方亚洲哲学（运用庄周梦蝶的比喻）之间的张力。在跨文化的释经理论比较研究中，比较柏拉图的洞穴比喻和庄周梦蝶的比喻会很有启发。西方的启蒙辩证法可以追溯到柏拉图的洞穴比喻，即人类从洞穴出来，朝着洞外闪光的太阳前进这一认知性的旅程。在西方文明发展过程中，有一种诠释理论趋向于强调人类生活中的个体生命，对自我的关注，不与他人或者公共事务发生关联。在对世界祛魅之后，人类理性已被工具化为科学地推销凌驾于世界之上的奥秘，导致意义缺失和生态毁灭，人类被困在一个铁笼之中（马克斯·韦伯语）。但是，东方的启蒙概念却另辟蹊径。从道家的原则出发的释经理论是一种类比性的诠释，推崇多样和多重的视觉与视域，而不是建立在自我关注（海德格尔）的本体论基础上。道家哲学中的神秘或自由感可以从朱熹所发展的儒家理论中看到。
跨文化释经与启蒙辩证法研究要以利玛窦为跨文化相遇的例子。要探索利玛窦如何处于西方理性思维和中国思想之间，从儒家释经理论角度（朱熹与王阳明）来解释儒家教导。利玛窦的释经策略是回归孔孟的正统学说，对朱熹的理学提出批评。但是，利玛窦对朱熹儒家理论的批评是不完全、肤浅甚至是不合格的。在我们进一步讨论儒家对释经理论所作出的贡献之时，在信仰间和文化间对话中评估利玛窦的基督教叙事和儒家伦理诠释很重要。在利玛窦的批评之外，我们应该关注和体会儒家的释经理论与大卫·特雷西的诠释学理论之间的对话。
从儒家的释经理论出发，我们的目标是要将建立在权力基础上的主流认知结构和建立在社会位置中的知识关系，从强调言说事件（word-event）优于书面文字（文本世界；互文性）的传统转向将边缘人群不同的、异类的话语整合进来。通过到对人类生存状态和社会位置的批判考察，扩展和加深文本主体的存在性知识，指出上帝（道）将叙事编入大众真实生活的行动。最后，通过在跨文化处境下比较奥德修斯和老子这两个象征性人物，我们对释经与启蒙辩证法的反思做一个总结。