【作者】 田薇；

【导师】 傅有德；

【作者基本信息】 山东大学 ， 宗教学， 2014， 博士

【摘要】 论文《宗教性视阈中的生存伦理——以基督教和儒家为范型》有两个主题性的思想元素,一个是理论的,就是构思一个关于“宗教性生存伦理”的基本观念和解释框架；一个是历史的,就是关于“基督教”和“儒家”两个范型的观念史解读。文中力图使二者融贯在一起,一方面依据宗教性生存伦理的观念和框架去深入解读基督教和儒家,使之呈现出作为“同”一种宗教性生存伦理又具有“不同”的各自独特的思路和模式,这是论文的中心内容和直接目的；另一方面又以对基督教和儒家各个基本观念环节的思想史解读来呈现和印证关于宗教性生存伦理的理论构想,这是论文的深层意图和间接目的。宗教性生存伦理是这样一种思路和观念：既是对宗教伦理予以生存论的定位,将宗教伦理理解为一种存在论意义上的生存性伦理；也是从宗教性的视阈出发去理解人类整个伦理性生存,将宗教性与人类的生存本性打通,进抵人性存在的内在结构和生存状态。这样一来,宗教伦理不再是某种特殊形态和特殊领域的伦理,而是人的整个生存伦理；反过来说,人类的生存伦理在根本上就是一种宗教性伦理。而这有赖于哲学形而上学和宗教形而上学的统一视阈,文中将两者融合为“形而上学宗教性”的视阈。在这一视阈中,一切高级而成熟的宗教形态就客体而言都是对某种至上者的终极性观照,就主体而言都是对人性有限性的超越性观照。因此“宗教性”的生存伦理关涉的乃是对于人的存在来说具有某种普遍的形而上学意义的价值生存模式,将人的整个生活世界和生存秩序引向某种终极性之维,同时也就获得了突破当下生存限度的超越性之维。宗教性生存伦理是这样一种思想观点：首先,宗教性生存伦理的起始观念(也是复归目标)是生存性、宗教性、伦理性三者同构的原发之域及其整体观念,这可以视作为由“存在的领会”而开启的直观。借助海德格尔关于家园的存在论诉求和基督临在的信徒经验的分析,将本源生存性与神圣宗教性打通,再借助海德格尔关于伦理的源始意涵(即近神而居)的开显,将伦理-宗教-生存全部打通。生存性言述着人的存在本体,伦理性指示着人的存在经纬,宗教性显现着人的存在限度并由此开敞生存的终极之维和超越之维。其次,宗教性生存伦理的轴心观念是“宗教性”。在梳理了各种相关思想资源尤其是西美尔的宗教性和舍勒的绝对域观念的基础上,文中用“宗教性”来表达关于人的存在的根本品性及其社会伦理秩序的价值根基,意在指向人类存在伦理的终极之维和超越之维。就是说,将“宗教性”生存伦理的根本品性和价值根基定位在终极性和超越性上。以“宗教性”概念为轴心,把宗教与个体生存和社会历史文化生存贯通起来,使宗教性的意义既可以指称整个文化价值系统中的绝对性依据,也可以指称个体有限性生存的终极归属。沿着这一思路来看,各种伦理价值传统,无论它们具有多少差异,都或隐或显地具有某种指向自身终极价值根据的宗教性品质；每一个人无论在现实生活中是否持有对某个特定对象的信仰,作为个体人格都在自身有限性的生存中包含着某种宗教性的超越追求。再次,源自人性深处的宗教形而上学倾向,亦即人类试图超越有限而取向无限的特殊的精神生存本性是宗教性生存伦理的先验论根据。这使得以“宗教性”为基调的生存伦理是一种深层伦理,植根于存在论的层面,其基本品格是关于某种无限而至上的终极根据和超越而崇高的生存信念的确认,彰显着人作为有限的精神性存在者的生存与其他一切存在者的存在之间的本质差异。这种特殊的生存本性就是内在于人性中的试图跨越有限性的藩篱,朝向绝对性生存的形而上学冲动。这意味着,植根于终极依据和生存信念之上的宗教性伦理源自人性深处的宗教形而上学倾向。最后,自由与回归是宗教性生存伦理的双向展开。在朝向终极而生存的形而上学倾向下,人类生存一方面绽放出某种不断突破有限性束缚的超越性姿态,使自由成为人的存在方式的本质之维,打开了理想之境的可能性,另一方面也展开为某种朝着本源回归的姿态,使生存之旅成为一种契合存在天命的回家之旅,使存在状态开放为一种与终极实在共存的本然之序。因而自由是超越束缚的自由,又是诉求归处的自由,不同于近代以来对象化模式下向外扩张的构造自由。这意味着,宗教性生存伦理是自由与回归的双向成全,充满生命厚度的存在方式。在设立了宗教性生存伦理的基本概念之后(第一二章),将基督教和儒家作为两个宗教性生存伦理的范型进行深入的观念史解读。换言之,把基督教和儒家放在一个宗教性生存伦理的解释框架中予以定位和阐发。这个解释框架是由几个基本思想环节构成的一个观念结构,具体展开为如下关于基督教和儒家的观念史解读的内容构架(第三-七章)：第三章“神圣和世俗：宗教性伦理的至上性根据”,借助伊利亚德神圣观念的视镜阐明,预设某种神圣而至上、终极而超越的意义根据,旨在作为人的价值生存秩序的合理性和正当性之基。基督教的上帝观和儒家的天命观就是这一观念的呈现。绝对性、人格性和神圣性是传统上帝观的基本特征。绝对的上帝构成为人类存在的基础和生存的依据；人格的上帝与人深度相遇并参与人类的历史生活；神圣的上帝以其神秘的超越性唤醒人类对自身存在限度的意识,并为之提供存在论上的归属感,由此预制了神人之间恩典-接纳、启示-信仰的生存关联模式。现代上帝观的重构带来了多元论景观和多向度的人神关联,文中探讨了利奇尔主义自由神学的社会论上帝观、巴特新正统神学全然相异的上帝观、朋霍费尔世俗神学的苦弱上帝观、莫尔特曼希望神学的末世论上帝观。儒家的天和天命不具有此岸和彼岸、世俗和神圣判然二分的性质,而是展开为一种天命和人性、天道和人道、天理和人心之天人之际、天人相与、天人合一的生存境界,具有人文性和宗教性、神圣性和世俗性杂糅的性质。它不是在实体上指称一个相对世俗世界的神圣世界,而是在功能上指称一种具有神圣性意义的价值根据。它以宗教性的终极意义为根底,以自然性和道德性为特征。对于天命观的讨论展开为两个问题：先从思想史的角度考察了天命观的确立和演变,然后以“四书”为据进行文本解读及其义理分析,揭示“与命与仁”和“立命存性”之天人之际、天人相与的生存境界。第四章“圆满与欠缺：宗教性伦理的人性论预设”,在和完满本源的关联中赢获了关于人性“原善”的宗教形而上学先验论的观念预设,而作为有限存在者又使人性充满了实存的欠缺性和破损性。文中立足于人的存在结构,从人性的双重性及其内在张力中解读基督教的罪性观。基督教关于神的形象和自然形象、超越的精神形象和有限的受造者形象的统一,构成了精神超越性和肉身有限性的双重性及其内在张力,正是在这种张力作用下酿成了人性的罪性,即不顾自然的有限性存在限度,试图变成无限的存在者,造成人性僭越的罪果,其中意志自由起了关键作用。儒家性善论的终极根据在天,人性源自天命,禀受天之正命存为人之性,故善。此可谓性善论的存在论理由。孔子“与命与仁”既表现出天命在身的存在论情怀,也表明仁乃天人相与之道,天与人合其德而共其在。子思“天命之谓性”和孟子“顺受正命以为性”,更是明确地为性善论提供了形而上学的终极理由。在此基础上,孟子采取以心释性的方式,提出了恻隐、羞恶、是非、辞让之善心来解释仁义礼智之善性,所谓尽心-知性-知天,可谓性善论的认识论理由。第五章“超拔与沉沦：宗教性伦理的超越路径”,通过分析人类精神生存的本性阐明超越性取向的可能性依据,按照学理划分,阐发了哲学的、艺术的和宗教的三种超越方式及其特征；按照实践范式,提出了自力超越和他力超越两种类型。基督教的超越模式是一条基于他力和信仰的神圣拯救之路,文中分析了他力拯救的神学根据和人性论理由,通过阐发奥古斯丁的自由论,揭示出罪中之人在自由择善上的意志无能。只有依靠外在他者的神圣力量,在启示-信仰中领受恩典,才能获救重生。儒家的超越模式则是基于自力与良知的成圣之道,从天-人之序来看,善性先天,良知固有,这是道德自力所以可能的内在根据。从人-天之序来看,良知意味着对天命的直接觉识和领悟,因而基于良知的道德自力之路是一个诉诸仁心、溯源天命、反省内求的过程。既包含着超越的内向性,即回归自身便回到了与天命同在的本源处,可谓尽心、知性、知天；也包含着超越的外向性,即将内在的良知性命向外开显广大直至充塞天地之间,实现内圣外王、天人合一的圣人境界。第六章“至爱与疏离：宗教性伦理的生存范式”,在与亲爱、友爱、性爱的比较中将“至爱”阐释为一种存在论性质的爱,出于自身之源,超越了对象化关系中对被爱者的价值诉求,以完全的自身性和无待性、给予性和接纳性而成为价值生成之源,并以云格尔爱的自身性结构和舍勒爱的先在性秩序为例进行了典型分析。然后,阐发基督教神性爱的绝对模式,神性爱是无条件的、无差别的、绝对的,构成基督教爱的伦理的超验根基。从神爱到人爱(爱神与爱人)意味着,不是爱植根于人性,而是人性植根于爱。借助于舍勒和尼布尔的理论视镜继续探讨了基督教爱观在现代的重构。相比之下,儒家的仁爱是一种人性爱的次第模式。从何为仁的层面来看,仁在天人之间获得定位,包含着人性、美德、仁爱、天人合一、天地生生及万物之性的意思,中心在于仁是人性之爱,但既不困于人性,而是延伸到天地万物的生生之仁,也不囿于爱人,而是仁者无不爱。故仁爱立足于人性,上达天地,下贯万物,是一个涵盖天地人的形而上学宗教性观念,也是一种普遍之爱。从实践仁爱的方式来看,是一种推己及人的次第模式且充满了多维内容。在涵养仁爱的心性和态度上主张守诚之道；在修养仁爱美德的道路和规范上讲究中庸和守礼；在施行仁爱的活动中主张忠恕之道；在行诸仁爱的内容和次第上注重“五伦”之实,讲究由近及远、推己及人、由人及物的顺序,即亲亲-仁民-爱物。故而,儒家仁爱具有非常突出的伦理品格,而仁爱伦理秩序的基石是以血缘亲情为纽带的家族关系,由此导向以“亲亲”为起点向外扩充的仁爱实践顺序。但是,只有将何谓仁与何以实现仁两者统一起来把握,将仁爱理解为一种起于亲亲又超越亲亲的普遍之爱才是合适的。第七章“永恒与虚无：宗教性伦理的终极关怀”,生命的有限性把人抛到了虚无还是永恒面前,这是终极关怀的视域,实质是一个希望的问题。希望和自由不可分隔,永恒的希望是在与自由的张力中生成的。在对自身反观的自由意识中,死亡提前出场,虚无成为一个生存论的挑战。然而否定死亡的永生和拒绝虚无的永恒的希望,也一并在自由意识中被开启。但是,希望却无法最终靠自由本身来支撑,自由只能把希望连同自由本身一并交给那关于永恒存在的终极信念。为了深刻阐明这一问题,先是详致研讨了利科关于希望话语的解释学观点,并直面人的实存世界的死亡命运探讨永恒希望的主题,然后追踪舍勒的向死而生与永生、海德格尔的向死而在与跨越沉沦、克尔凯郭尔的绝望致死病和信仰生存、蒂利希的非存在的焦虑和存在的勇气等一系列理论,充分论述了永恒希望的终极话题。接着,分别讨论基督教关于永生的盼望和儒家关于不朽的追求。基督教有关这一问题的典型理论即终末论。文中梳理了从旧约到新约终末论的思想发展线索,阐发了终末论的基本思想观念,充分审理了现代终末论关于永恒希望的重构,尤其是麦奎利关于末世论的实存论解释和莫尔特曼希望神学的终末论体系。相比之下,儒家的不朽追求属于在世关怀,由于实用理性的精神品格,儒家坚持从活着出发的生存立场,立足于一个世界一个人生,当务之事在生不在死,应该操持的是在世的社会事务和道德人伦,而不是来世不明的神鬼生活。在这样的前提下,儒家的不朽追求是从生而非死的视角求取活的永恒价值,即超出个人生死之外与人类同在、与日月同辉的不朽意义。于是,不朽意味着今世的作为不会随着个人的死亡而消失,相反在身后留下了传世的历史性影响。正所谓立功、立德、立言之三不朽。不朽还有着最为平实而基本的关怀,就是在子子孙孙身上不尽的生命延续。不朽也可以透过天人合一、万物一体的观念来领会,由之发现其终极关切的亦人文亦宗教的性质。更多还原

【Abstract】 This dissertation has two principal elements:one is theoretical, establishing a basic conception and framework of "religious existential ethics"; the other is historical, interpreting Christianity and Confucianism from the perspective of intellectual history. I am trying to weave these two principal elements into a coherent whole. On the one hand, I provide an in-depth understanding of Christianity and Confucianism from the perspective of religious existential ethics, presenting them as one kind of religious existential ethics, but with different approaches and models. This is the main content and direct purpose. On the other hand, I provide a historical interpretation of basic elements of Christianity and Confucianism in order to confirm the conception of religious existential ethics. This is the deeper intention and indirect purpose.In the first two chapters I lay out the some basic characteristics of religious existential ethics. On the one hand, it gives religious ethics an existential orientation, seeing religious ethics as a kind of existential ethics; on the other hand, it understands human being’s ethical existence from a religious perspective. It thus bridges religiosity and human being’s existential nature. In this sense, religious ethics is no longer a particular kind ethics in a particular realm, but human being’s entire existential ethics. To put it in another way, human being’s existential ethics is in the end a kind of religious ethics. This depends on the fusion of horizons of philosophical metaphysics and religious metaphysics. In this dissertation I fuse them into a horizon of "metaphysical religiosity." From this horizon, every form of advanced and mature religion is, from objective aspect, the ultimate concern for some kind of supreme being; and from subjective aspect, the transcendental concern for the finitude of human being. Therefore, religious existential ethics has universal metaphysical significance. It directs human being’s entire life world and life order toward some ultimate dimension, and acquires some transcendental dimension which goes beyond the limitation of current existence.Religious existential ethics has the following characteristics. First, its initial conceptions (which are also the goal of returning) are an original realm and a unity consisting of existentiality, religiosity, and ethics. This can be seen as an intuition opened by "existential comprehension." By appealing to Heidegger’s ontology of homeland and by analyzing believer’s experience of Christ’s presence, I bridge original existentiality and holy religiosity. By appropriating Heidegger’s understanding of the original meaning of ethics as living closer to gods, I bridge ethics, religion and existence. Existentiality narrates human being’s existential substance, ethics indicates human being’s existential guideline, and religiosity exhibits human being’s existential limitation and opens the ultimate and transcendental dimensions.Second, the pivotal conception of religious existential ethics is "religiosity." Having surveyed various intellectual resources, especially Georg Simmel and Max Scheler, I use "religiosity" to express the fundamental characteristic of human existence and the value of social and ethical order, directing toward the ultimate and transcendental dimension of human existence. To put it another way, I anchor the fundamental characteristic of religious existential ethics and its value on its ultimacy and transcendentality. Taking religiosity as the axis, we can bridge religion, individual existence, and social, historical and cultural existence. Religiosity may refer to the ultimate criterion of the entire cultural value system, and also to the ultimate destiny of finite individual existence. Along with this approach, every ethical tradition, however different they are, has, either explicitly or implicitly, some religious characteristic, aiming at its own ultimate criterion of value; and every human being, whether he/she believes in any particular religion, has, as individual, some kind of religious transcendental pursuit in his/her finite existence.Third, the deep inclination of religious metaphysics, i.e., human being’s special spiritual existence to transcend his finite nature and pursue infinity, is a priori foundation of religious existential ethics. Therefore, the basic characteristic of existential ethics based on religiosity is to confirm an infinite and supreme foundation, and confirm a transcendental and sublime existential belief. It manifests the fundamental difference between human being as finite spiritual being and all the other beings. Fourth, freedom and return is double unfolding of religious existential ethics. In the inclination toward ultimate existential metaphysics, human being’s existence shows its transcendental stance of continuous break of its finitude. This makes freedom the essential dimension of human existence, and opens the possibility of ideal realm. On the other hand, human existence also exhibits a returning stance to its origin. This makes human existence a journey returning home in accordance with human destiny. It realizes the co-existence of human being and ultimate being. Therefore, the freedom at issue is both to transcend our constraint, and to appeal to our return to our destiny, and thus very different from the constructive freedom in modern philosophy. Religious existential ethics is double fulfilment of freedom and return, a mode of existence with the depth of life.Having set the basic conceptions of religious existential ethics (Chapters1and2), I take Christianity and Confucianism as two paradigms, and provide an interpretation of them from the perspective of intellectual history. This framework is an intellectual structure consisting of several basic elements, and will unfold itself in the following interpretation of Christianity and Confucianism (Chapters3to7).Chapter3("Holiness and Secularity:The Foundation of the Supremacy of Religious Ethics") makes use of Eliade’s conception of holiness and presupposes some foundation of meaning, which is both holy and supreme, both ultimate and transcendental. It is the foundation of justification and legitimacy of human being’s existential order. Christian conception of God and Confucian conception of the Decree of Heaven is the manifestation of this conception. Absoluteness, personhood, and holiness are basic characteristics of traditional conception of Christian God. This absolute God turns out to be the foundation and criterion of human existence. This personal God encounters human being and participates in human history. This holy God, with his mysterious transcendence, awakes human being’s consciousness of his own limitation, and provides the sense of belonging. It also creates the models of grace-acceptance, and revelation-faith. Modern conceptions of God brings pluralistic picture and multi-dimensional link between human being and God, and I discuss various ideas about God in Albrecht Ritschl, Karl Barthes, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, and Jurgen Moltmann. In contrast, Confucian conception of Heaven and Decree of Heaven does not have the dichotomy between this world and that world, secularity and holiness, but unfold an existential state, harmonizing Decree of Heaven and human nature, the Way of Heaven and the Way of human being, the Principle of Heaven and human heart, and culminating in the harmony of Heaven and human being. It does not direct to a holy world, in contrast with a secular world, but refers to a foundation of value with holy significance. It is rooted in the ultimacy of religiosity, and has the characteristics of naturalness and morality. I will discuss two questions in Confucian conception of Decree of Heaven:first, I will discuss the establishment and evolution of conception of Decree of Heaven from the perspective of intellectual history, and then I will analyze, based on the "Four Books," the philosophical meaning of Confucian existential state.Chapter4("Fulfilment and Deficiency:Presupposition of Human Nature in Religious Ethics") discusses the "original goodness" of human nature in its relation to the perfect principle (this is the presupposition of religious metaphysics), and the deficiency of human being as finite being. I discuss Christian conception of sin on the basis of human being’s existential structure, the two dimensions of human nature and their tension. The unity of the image of God and the image of Nature, and the unity of transcendental spiritual image and finite created image, forms the tension between spiritual transcendentality and bodily finitude, and it is this tension that explains human being’s sinfulness. The neglect of our natural limitation, and the attempt to become infinite, is the result of human being’s overstepping his boundary. And in this process, our free will plays an important role. Confucian idea of the goodness of human nature finds its ultimate justification in the Heaven. Human nature is originated in the Decree of Heaven, so it is good. Decree of Heaven is the existential reason for the goodness of human nature."Destiny and benevolence" not only shows Confucius’undertaking of the Decree of Heaven, but also shows that benevolence is the way of harmonizing Heaven and human being. Zisi’s "Decree of Heaven is Human Nature" and Mencius’"obedience to the Decree of Heaven is human nature" provide ultimate justification of the goodness of human nature. On this basis, Mencius interprets human nature with his theory of heart, and puts forward the doctrine of "four hearts"(commiseration, the sense of shame, a reverential attitude toward others, and the sense of right and wrong). He uses them to explain the four cardinal virtues of benevolence, righteousness, propriety, and wisdom. The route from striving in one’s hear, to knowing the human nature, and to knowing the Heaven provides the epistemological reason for the goodness of human nature.Chapter5("Transcendence and Fallenness:The Transcendental Paths of Religious Ethics") illustrates the possible grounds of transcendental inclination by analyzing human being’s spiritual existence. I discuss three different types of transcendence: philosophical, artistic, and religious, and distinguishes transcendence by one’s own power and transcendence by external power. Christian model of transcendence is based on external power and the sacred salvation. I analyze the grounds of salvation by external power in theology and in human nature. Through an interpretation of Augustine’s theory of freedom, I emphasize that human beings in the constraint of sin are impotent of choosing the good. Therefore, human beings have to rely on the sacred force from an external other, and gain rebirth through accepting Grace in revelation and faith. Confucian model of transcendence is based on one’s own power and consciousness, and it is a path of becoming a sage. Considering the Heaven-man order, the goodness of human nature is a priori, and consciousness is innate. This is the internal justification of becoming moral by one’s own power. Consciousness is the direct comprehension of the Decree of Heaven. Therefore the path of become moral by one’s own power is to appeal to benevolence, to trace back to the Decree of Heaven, and to retrospect in oneself. It includes both the inwardness of transcendence, i.e., to return to oneself is also to return to the common origin of Decree of Heaven, and the outwardness of transcendence, i.e., to unfold one’s consciousness and existence to fill the entire world, and to realize the state of sage in the ideal of "internal saints and external kings" and in the harmony of Heaven and human being.Chapter6("Ultimate Love and Alienation:Existential Paradigm of Religious Ethics") compares the love of parents, the love of friends, and sexual love, and draws the conclusion that the "ultimate love" is an existential love, generated by the origin of oneself. It transcends the value of beloved in objective relation and becoming the origin of value. I reach this conclusion through an analysis of Eberhard Jiinge’s structure of love and Max Scheler’s order of love. I then illustrate the absolute model of holy love, which is unconditional, impartial, and absolute. It forms the transcendental root of Christian ethics of love. The transition from God’s love to man’s love means not that love is rooted in human nature, but human nature is rooted in love. In contrast, Confucian benevolence is a hierarchical model of love. Benevolence includes human nature, virtue, and harmony of Heaven and human being. The center of benevolence is the love of humanity, but it is not limited to humanity, but extends to everything in the world, for the benevolent person loves everything in the world. Therefore, benevolence bridges Heaven/Earth and everything in the world. It is a metaphysical-religious conception, and a kind of universal love. As for the practice of benevolence, there are a number of dimensions:in cultivating benevolence and appropriate attitude it advocates truthfulness, in cultivating virtue and regulations it advocates mean and propriety, in practicing benevolent actions it advocates doing one’s best and using oneself as a measure to gauge others. It emphasizes the procedure from the near to the distant, from oneself to others, from human being to things. Therefore, Confucian love has salient ethical character, and is rooted in family relationship based on bloodline. We should understand benevolence as originated in parents-children affection and also transcending this affection and reaching a kind of universal love.Chapter7("Eternity and Nihility:The Ultimate Concern of Religious Ethics") deals with the finitude of human life. This finitude throws human beings in front of the critical alternatives between eternity and nihility, and this is the horizon of ultimate concern. It is a question of hope in the end. Hope is closely linked with freedom, and the hope for eternity arises in the tension with freedom. Death presents itself in free will’s retrospective examination, and nihility becomes a challenge to one’s existence. But eternal life which denies death, and eternal hope which negates nihility also present themselves in free will. But hope cannot be sustained only by freedom. Freedom and hope have to be given to the ultimate faith to the eternal being. To illustrate the ultimate concern of eternal hope, I discuss the views of Paul Ricoeur, Max Scheler, Martin Heidegger, Soren Kierkegaard, and Paul Tillick. And then I discuss the difference between Christian hope for eternity, and Confucian pursuit of immortality. Christian view is eschatological. I survey the development of eschatology from Old Testament to New Testament, discuss the basic concepts of eschatology, and examine the contemporary eschatology’s reconstructions of eternal hope (especially John Macquarrie and Jurgen Moltmann). In contrast, Confucian pursuit of immortality is a worldly concern. Because of its characteristic of practical rationality, Confucianism insists that we should focus on the realm of living, this world, and this life. The key is not death but life. It is concerned with worldly social and ethical issues, instead of life of the other world. It thus pursues the eternal value of living, and the immortal meaning of one’s life. Confucian immortality means that one’s deeds in life will not vanish along with one’s death, but rather leave historical influence. This immortality is represented in establishing one’s deeds, virtue and word. Confucian immortality is also represented in the continuation of one’s offspring. Confucian immortality can be comprehended through the conception of the harmony of Heaven and human being, and thus exhibits both humane and religious characteristics.更多还原