왕필과 유용의 세계

Abstract

Wangbi’s commentaries on The Analects, The Book of Changes, Laozi and their points of view are three. Firstly, He made efforts to give respect to Confucius instead of Laozi. Secondly, one yao(⚋ or ⚊) among the hexagrams was more important than other hexagrams, so that he was against the symbol and number school of the Han dynasty. Thirdly, since he tried to substitute assertion of equalitarian Taoism by the Confucian notion of the noble and the humble, he ran into the new interpretation on Laozi on the basis of the Book of Changes. Wangbi maintained the theory of heartedness for the sage, though Laozi and Zhuangzi stressed heartlessness of the sage as in the sentence of ‘Sage does not love people.’(Laozi) and the metaphor of ‘dead ash’(Zhuangzi). However, Wanbi was different. Without the chance for charity and anxiety, a sage would never have a motif for construction of civilization. Because of emotional motivation, a sage made rituals(li), and practiced love(ren) with holy brightness(shen ming). Wangbi obviously established his own position between Confucius and Laozi, for example, a will which made many into the one(yi): A decision in which only the one could be the basis of everything, an assumption of which the base should be formlessness which was not yet formed like a thing, and a logic that the one was so formless and that formlessness was nothing, etc. It shows the unification of the none(wu) and the one(yi), then the none was not empty but entire. To Wangbi, the emptiness was the one; the one was the emptiness. Wangbi emphasizes usefulness(yong) which combines the none(wu) and wholeness(you) to universalize his conceptions coherently. Usefulness draws ‘the dead none’(emptiness) into ‘the alive one’(wholeness). In light of usefulness, the emptiness and the wholeness are not unique anymore. Usefulness becomes the universal criterion of value judgement. According to Wangbi’s point of view, a few conclusions have been distilled. First, Wangbi has no notion of Tiyong such as the Neo-confucian tool for substance(ti) and function(yong). Second, Wangbi’s the none(wu) is not similar to Laozi’s, so that the noble thing belongs not to the none but to the one. Third, in contrast with Laozi who has never divided this world into the noble and the humble, Wangbi has pursued the accomplishment of civilization above Confucian rituals, laws, and institutions. Wangbi’s way of thinking followed the Book of Changes, and as a result of that, his interpretation on Laozi was very akin to Confucianism, including Xunzi.