This paper critically examines Lu Guolong’s interpretation of tianren heyi, arguing that his portrayal of it as an inherent virtue of Chinese culture—and his positioning of Daoism between Confucianism and Buddhism—remains conceptually inadequate. Through a textual analysis of oracle-bone inscriptions, the Shangshu, and the Guoyu, the study reconstructs the notions of shenmin bu za and the four historical “transgressions”, thereby demonstrating that tianren heyi is not a singular, unchanging tradition but a historically generated and internally diverse phenomenon. By distinguishing between the Confucian model of you ren zhi tian, the Daoist model of you tian zhi ren or you ziran zhi ren, and the Daoist practice of yi ren zhi tian, this paper highlights the Daoist distinctive emphasis on the embodied dimension—pursuing tianren heyi through corporeal cultivation and the twin disciplines of waidan and neidan. The modern trend of celebrating tianren heyi as an emblem of Chinese cultural excellence calls for cautious reinterpretation—one that carefully distinguishes its ontological meaning from its practical and historical articulations.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Paulos Huang
Chenqing Zhao
Religions
Shanghai University
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Huang et al. (Fri,) studied this question.
www.synapsesocial.com/papers/696c79cde45ebfc9113cd451 — DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/rel17010109