What is the ideological purpose of Wei and Jin metaphysics?

The saying that "the Qing dynasty is a mistake for the country" is the general evaluation of Wei and Jin metaphysics by most historians and scholars in Chinese history since the reign of the two Jin dynasties and up to the 20th century. As history enters the 20th century, with the deepening of Chinese scholars' understanding of Western culture and the influence and inspiration of Western culture and scholarship, people begin to re-examine and re-evaluate Wei and Jin metaphysics. With the efforts of several generations of scholars in the late Qing Dynasty, the Republic of China, and after the founding of the People's Republic of China, Wei and Jin metaphysics, as an important part of modern Chinese academics, became an indispensable and important link in the history of Chinese academics, thoughts, and cultural development, as did the Zhou and Qin zhuzi, the scriptures of the Han Dynasty, the Buddhist studies of Sui and Tang dynasties, the Song and Ming philosophies, and the Qing Dynasty academics, and was given a brand-new affirmation and appraisal. According to the characteristics of the influence of Western philosophical thought presented at different stages of time in the 20th century, as well as the interrelated influences between this research and the political, economic, and cultural life of the Chinese real society, the research of Wei and Jin Xuanxue is divided into five stages to be commented on, in order to have a general grasp of the research of Wei and Jin Xuanxue in the 20th century.

One, before the 1930s

As Hou Wai-lu pointed out in his "General History of Chinese Thought", before the Qing dynasty, the evaluation of the Qing dynasty, there is a point is the same, that is, more than its academic content, and will be associated with the so-called internal and external problems, in order to make clear the cause and effect. This weakness, to the qing dynasty scholars, will start a reaction, more for the wei and jin scholars, false defense. [1] This new tendency for the defense of Wei and Jin scholars get more and more strong echo and support, until the history of the 20th century into the late Qing Dynasty.

Liu Shipei in 1907 wrote "on the relationship between ancient and modern learning style changes and politics and customs" article, in the reference to the presentation of many historians and scholars, including the end of the Ming and early Qing Gu Yanwu (Tinglin), the Wei Jin and the six dynasties of the study of the negative evaluation, pointed out that they do not know that the two Jin and the six dynasties of the study of the stagnant in the marketplace, the home of the heart of the high and far-reaching, advocating nature, the only standard of vision, learning is expensive to self-compliance, this is the evidence of this. This is the evidence. Therefore, a time to learn the scholar, its self-esteem is high, transcendental idea of the dust, not for the floating glory of the beam, not for the dust net opposing, by the open and noble, by the anorexic and happy days. The courtiers have advocated its wind, folk soaked into the popular fashion, although said not conducive to the rule of the country, but the good of the learning style, there are still several ends, why? To high hidden as noble, then the wind of impatience decline, to forget for high, then the heart of suspicion died, to clear words and Shang, then the idea of vulgarity does not arise, to tour and sing and reserved, then the wind of greed and cruelty since the reform. Therefore, even though the body of the mean, the ambition is high. Being a word, the Wei Jin and six dynasties of learning, not domain in the humble near also, Wei Jin and six dynasties of ministers, not stained in the dirty time also." [2] with the history of Fan Ning people eye Wang He for Jie Zhou, Gu Tinglin to Wang He J Ruan people for the sinner of the criticism is very different, Liu Shipei affirmed the Wei Jin and Six Dynasties period of the character of the high, learning style of the good, he believes that the Han and Wei dynasty family and country of the collapse, the decline of the common fashion, the politicians of the political behavior should bear the main responsibility, and the liberal style of the literati, the misanthropic attitude is to avoid disaster (" far from the harm "). The liberal style and misanthropic attitude of the literati was only to avoid trouble ("far from harm") rather than to seek profit, and although their attitude and behavior had no direct benefit to the governance of the country, their style and character of lofty and noble nature had a more or less positive demonstrative effect on the harsh political style and the vulgarity of greed.

Immediately after Liu Shipei, Zhang Taiyan in 1910 to write the "five dynasties of learning" article, the same as Liu, Zhang's also on the history of the academic style of the gains and losses of the comparison, criticized the history of the historians and scholars think that the decline of the customs of the Wei and Jin Dynasty is more than the previous dynasties of the preconceptions, pointed out that: "the Chi-Saying, do not bother to integrate the end and the beginning, if the metaphysical criticized, it is only the Daiya, to see the most hidden, to know the wind. The only thing is Daya, to see the most hidden, to know the wind from. The scholar of metaphysics, because it does not contradict with the art of writing, and the wing to support the... The scriptures are not as dominant as the Rites and Music, the government is not as important as the Laws and Orders, the techniques are not as subtle as the arithmetic, and the forms are not as urgent as the medicine and stones, which are summarized by all the famous scholars of the five dynasties. Their words are based on the falsehood, but their skills are controlled by the reality, therefore, they are valuable. In the five dynasties, there was metaphysics, knowledge and tranquility were intertwined, and harmony came out of their nature. Therefore, the arrogance and lechery were rested at the top, and the restlessness and competition were eliminated at the bottom... The world saw the five dynasties in the emperor's position for a few days, and the country was weakened, so they left their academics and behaved in an unorthodox manner. The five dynasties so do not compete, by Ren Shigui, but also in the words and appearance of people, not in the metaphysics." [3] with Liu's way of writing is different, Zhang's more than quoted historical facts as supporting evidence, and came to the following more credible conclusions: First, the customs of the Wei and Jin dynasties are not more than the Han customs more debilitating; Second, the five dynasties of the celebrities more than a certain aspect of the specialties and skills, "their words follow the false, their art control real"; Third, the metaphysical science of tranquility and nourishment, therefore, on the society of the upper class arrogance, the lower social class. Thirdly, Xuanxue emphasizes on tranquility and nourishment of nature, so it has a calming effect on the arrogance of the upper class and the restlessness of the lower class; fourthly, the shortness of the kingdom of the five dynasties and the weakening of the state can not be attributed to the Xuanxue, but to the improper way of selecting and appointing the officials on the political level. It is worth noting that the chapter mentioned: "all for the metaphysics, necessary to the name, check with the points, and the six arts square technology, also to the name, check with the points. The six arts of square techniques are also based on names and categorized into parts. It is true that the rules of counting, judging forms and measuring sounds are all the same. Clothing has decline, the penalty has increased or decreased. The biography said: 'criminal name from the business, the name of the text from the ritual.' Therefore, the metaphysics is often supported with the rites and laws. Since the fall of Tang, the metaphysics is extinct, the six arts of square technology also decline." (ibid., pp. 75-76) This shows that Zhang's implicitly recognized that the metaphysicians were concerned about the name and rationality of the method of thinking to help develop the academic, mastery of technology, and maintenance of rituals and laws.

Before the 1930s, scholars who really paid attention to the ideas or philosophical contributions of the famous scholars of the Wei and Jin dynasties were mainly Feng Youlan, who directly utilized the concepts and doctrines of the history of Western philosophy to compare and explain Guo Xiang's philosophy. His Philosophy of Guo Xiang, published in 1927, was an attempt to construct a "very good philosophical system" of ancient Chinese philosophers with the help of Western academic concepts. First of all, the article disagrees with the view of many that there is no progress in Chinese philosophy, and argues that Chinese philosophy, on the face of it, is a continual teaching of the ideas of the predecessors by the successors, but in essence, each one's teaching has its own derivations, which is progress, as in the case of Guo Xiang's Zhuangzi zhi zhi zhi, which is Guo Xiang's philosophy. In order to explain this point of view, Feng Youlan quoted from Aristotle's statement about Potentiality and Actuality to show that things are becoming more complicated from simplicity, and learning is progressing from ambiguity to clarity in the historical view of academic progress. He argues that Guo Xiang not only could extend and utilize Zhuangzi's ideas, but also could use abstract and common theories to express the meanings contained in Zhuangzi's writings and had new insights. Secondly, the paper argues that Guo Xiang's doctrine of "unification" is very similar to that of the ancient Greek philosopher Parmenides. Because the so-called "Tao" of Laozhuang is not a mathematical zero, while Guo Xiang's Tao is a zero, and all things are so and so only because they are naturally so and so. Guo Xiang "Zhi Bei You" "no ancient, no modern, no beginning, no end" note: "not only nothing can not be transformed into something, there is also can not be transformed into nothing. Is there for things, although thousands of changes, but not one for nothing. Can not be one for nothing, since the beginning of time, there is no unprecedented time and always exist." This note shows that on the one hand, Guo Xiang categorizes Tao as zero, but on the other hand, he believes that although there are many changes, there cannot be nothing, and it exists eternally. This is indeed similar to the idea of Barmenides, the founder of the Aelian school in ancient Greece, about "existence". Barthes believed that "Being exists", and that existence is eternal, unborn and undying; existence is one, continuous and indivisible, etc. Once again, the article argues that Guo Xiang zeroed in on the Tao. Again, the paper argues that Guo Xiang's idea that the universe is ever-changing is similar to Heraclitus' idea that "everything flows". Finally, the paper argues that Guo Xiang's philosophy, like Spinoza's Ethics, is a combination of positivism and mysticism, and that Guo Xiang's metaphysics is positivism, while his theory of xuan-tong-wu-wei is epistemology, and therefore Guo Xiang's type of Taoist philosophy, though mystical, is not in conflict with science. Feng Youlan's research and description of Guo Xiang's philosophy clearly show that he was trying to think and interpret Guo Xiang's philosophy with the concepts of Western philosophy.

From the above overview and analysis of traditional Chinese scholarship of the Wei and Jin dynasties before the 1930s, we can feel that Chinese scholarship of this period was undergoing significant changes. However, since this was only the initial stage of modern Chinese scholarship, the research in this period bears more traces of comparisons, so new breakthroughs need time and the participation and efforts of scholars from many different disciplines.

The 1930s and 1940s of the twentieth century

The study of Wei and Jin metaphysics in the sense of modern Chinese scholarship began in this period. At that time, China was in the midst of a national tragedy, and the Chinese nation was in the autumn of life and death, but it was during this period that a group of scholars from different disciplines, such as philosophy, history, literature, aesthetics, and so on, began to study and discuss the cultural and academic research of the Wei, Jin, and North and South Dynasties, and among them, Tang Yutong, because of his creative and systematic research and interpretation of Wei and Jin metaphysics, thus providing the basis for the modern academic meaning of the discipline of Wei and Jin metaphysics research. Among them, Tang Yutong has made the most outstanding contribution to the establishment of Wei and Jin metaphysics as a modern academic discipline because of his creative and systematic research and interpretation of the subject.

The main contribution of Tang Yutong to the study of Wei and Jin metaphysics is reflected in the nine essays he completed in the ten years from 1938 to 1947, which were later published by the People's Publishing House in 1957 under the title of "Essays on Wei and Jin Metaphysics". These essays were devoted to the study of the ideological origin, academic method, philosophical nature, developmental stage and historical influence of Wei and Jin metaphysics, forming a relatively comprehensive and systematic doctrinal system. In particular, he pioneered the systematic study of Wei and Jin metaphysics as a whole from the perspective of philosophical ontology, which had a decisive influence on the basic direction and scale of Wei and Jin metaphysics research in the whole of the twentieth century.

If Hu Shih's Outline of the History of Chinese Philosophy[4] and Feng Youlan's History of Chinese Philosophy[5] are examples of the general history of Chinese philosophy, then Tang Yutong's study of Wei and Jin metaphysics is an example of the specialized history of Chinese philosophy or the interrupted history of Chinese philosophy. Tang Yutong has similarities with Hu Shi and Feng Youlan in terms of the general academic background, while each of them has its own characteristics in terms of the specific research path. The so-called similarity in the general academic background refers to the fact that they both studied in the West and received rigorous training in Western academics, and at the same time, they also have a certain degree of family origin, received systematic education in traditional Chinese culture in their early years, and have a profound foundation in Chinese nationalism, so that they can truly realize their own knowledge in the historical context of the "Eastward Progression of Western Learning". Under the historical background of "the eastward gradation of western learning", they can truly "integrate the Chinese and western cultures, and fuse the present and the past". The most important gain from accepting western academic training is to be enlightened in the method of academic research, and Hu Shi was the first one to realize this among the scholars in the generation of "May Fourth", he talked about the interpretation, establishment or reconstruction of Chinese philosophical system in the preface of "History of Chinese Philosophy", which is the predecessor of "History of Pre-Qin", he realized that: "I am not sure if I can explain, establish or reconstruct Chinese philosophical system, but I am aware that I can do so. He realized that "I am more fortunate than the collators and exegetes of the past, for I have gained many useful insights from the study of the history of European philosophy. Only those who have had similar experiences in comparative studies (e.g., in comparative languages) can really appreciate the value of Western philosophy in helping me to explain the ancient Chinese system of thought." [6] Cai Yuanpei, in the preface to Hu Shih's Outline of the History of Chinese Philosophy, also made it clear that: "If we want to organize a system, there is nothing to rely on in the writings of the ancients, and we cannot help but rely on the history of philosophy of the Westerners. Therefore, those who have not studied the history of Western philosophy cannot form a proper form." (ibid. (ibid., p. 155) All those who have received rigorous training in Western scholarship and who have made great achievements in the process of reconstruction of modern Chinese scholarship have not made significant innovations and breakthroughs in methodological issues, and Tang Yutong's study of the metaphysics of the Wei and Jin dynasties, as well as Hu Shih's study of the history of ancient Chinese philosophy, are both new creations in philosophical methodology, thus confirming the point that the key to the study of a philosopher or a philosophical school lies in the ability to capture the essence of the philosophy. The key to the study of a philosopher or a philosophical school lies in grasping the method and ****ness of the philosopher's or the philosophical school's thinking. This is perhaps the greatest achievement of the "May 4th" generation of scholars in the process of learning Western culture and receiving Western academic training.

In order to illustrate the exemplary role of Tang Yutong's study of Wei and Jin metaphysics in the study of the specialized or interrupted history of Chinese philosophy, as well as the significance of the study of the general history of Chinese philosophy as a whole, it is necessary to go back to the achievements and limitations of the study of the history of Chinese philosophy by Hu Shih and Feng Youlan. Hu Shih's Outline of the History of Chinese Philosophy discusses Chinese philosophy from the time of Laozi in the Spring and Autumn Period (6th century B.C.) to the establishment of the Qin Dynasty (3rd century B.C.). In the introduction to his book, he divides the history of Chinese philosophy into three eras: from Laozi to Hanfei, ancient philosophy, also known as "the philosophy of the sons"; from the Han Dynasty to the Northern Song Dynasty, medieval philosophy, which is divided into two periods: from the Han Dynasty to the Jin Dynasty, medieval philosophy in the first period, and from the Eastern Jin Dynasty to the Northern Song Dynasty, medieval philosophy in the second period; and after the Tang Dynasty to the end of the Qing Dynasty, modern philosophy. Therefore, the scope of his "Outline of the History of Chinese Philosophy" only covers the ancient part of the history of Chinese philosophy as he defined it, but not the period of the Wei and Jin Dynasties, and because of this, the book was renamed "History of Ancient Chinese Philosophy" when it was included in the "Wan-you Literature Library" in 1930. Although the book fails to cover the philosophical contents of the Middle Ages and the Wei and Jin Dynasties, we can still read from the book the news of Hu Shi's preliminary understanding of the philosophy of the Middle Ages and the Wei and Jin Dynasties. First of all, regarding the historical materials, Hu Shih thought that the study of the history of philosophy of the Middle Ages faced great difficulties in terms of historical materials, among which there were a lot of additions, alterations, forgeries, and dispersions, "Therefore, the historical materials of the philosophy of the Middle Ages are the most incomplete. It is the most unfortunate thing in the history of Chinese philosophy that we cannot completely recover the philosophical writings of the people of Wei and Jin." [7] Secondly, about the position of Chinese philosophy in the history of world philosophy, he thinks that the philosophy in the world can be divided into east and west, the east branch is divided into India and China, and the west branch is divided into Greece and Judaism, and at the beginning these four branches happened independently of each other. "After the Han Dynasty, the Jewish lineage joined the Greek lineage and became the philosophy of the Middle Ages in Europe. The Indian lineage joined the Chinese lineage and became the philosophy of the Middle Ages in China." (ibid., pp. 165-166) Because he took the Indian philosophy to join the Chinese philosophy as the main factor of the session of the Chinese philosophy of the Middle Ages, therefore, it also determines the following point, that is, thirdly, he did not have a deep understanding of the Chinese philosophy of the Middle Ages and the philosophy of the Wei and Jin Dynasties, and did not have a high appraisal.

Regardless of whether Hu Shi's staging of the history of Chinese philosophy is appropriate or not, and whether his comments on the influence of Indian Buddhism after its introduction into China are accurate or not, his three basic views on Chinese medieval philosophy, especially the philosophy of the Wei and Jin dynasties, may lead to a double "cover" of the understanding of Chinese medieval philosophy and the philosophy of the Wei and Jin dynasties. The first is the "obscuring" at the technical level. Firstly, the "obscuration" on the technical level, because he thinks that the study of the philosophy of the Middle Ages faces great difficulties in terms of historical materials, especially the inability to recover the philosophical writings of the people of the Wei and Jin dynasties, which may lead him to give up or neglect the study of the philosophical issues of this period out of the difficulties in the technical treatment; and moreover, because he thinks that the doctrines of the period from the Han to the Jin dynasties are but a compromise between the ancient philosophy of the Zhuzi and the philosophy of the Zuzi, which is a good example. What's more, because he thinks that the doctrines from Han to Jin are merely a compromise between the ancient scholars and the scholars of the Zu Zi, he fails to see the development of many scholars or scholastic schools from Han to Jin in the compromise and derivation; especially serious is that he is likely to neglect the value of the philosophical historical materials accumulated by Wang (Bi), He (Yan), Xiang (Xiu), Guo (Xiang) in the form of commentaries on the Zhouyi, Lunyue, Laozi, and Zhuangzi in the form of such a special writing. Secondly, it is the "obscuring" of value, because he thinks that it is only because of the introduction of Indian philosophy that Chinese medieval philosophy can be "unique and colorful" in addition to the philosophy of the sons, naturally, he focuses his attention on Chinese medieval philosophy on the scholarly results achieved by medieval Buddhist philosophy. He naturally focused his attention on medieval Chinese philosophy on the scholarly achievements of medieval Buddhist philosophy. As a result of the above double "obscuration" at the technical and value levels, it is conceivable that Hu Shi's research on the history of medieval philosophy would face a major dilemma, and this is perhaps one of the major reasons for the delay in the publication of his subsequent research after the publication of his Outline of the History of Chinese Philosophy. As a result of this "obscuring", Hu Shi's research on the history of philosophy or thought in the Middle Ages will be put to rest on at least two very crucial issues, one is that the metaphysics of the Wei and Jin dynasties, as an important part of the history of Chinese philosophy, will be put to rest, and the other is that the meaningful interaction between metaphysics and Buddhism in the period of the Wei, Jin, and the North and South Dynasties, as an important part of the history of cultural exchanges between China and foreign countries as well as the history of the development of Chinese culture, will be put to rest. Secondly, the very meaningful interaction between metaphysics and Buddhism in the Wei, Jin, and North/South Dynasties as an important link in the history of Sino-foreign cultural exchanges and the development of Chinese culture will be lost.

Feng Youlan's History of Chinese Philosophy pays more attention to the important figures of the Wei, Jin, and Northern and Southern Dynasties than Hu Shi's History of Chinese Philosophy or Thought, and he devotes two chapters, one above and the other below, to discussing the thought of metaphysicians from He Yan and Wang Bi to Guo Xiang. Feng Youlan used the name of "metaphysics" to summarize the object of philosophical history research and its characteristics in the period of North and South Dynasties, which was a great progress compared with Hu Shi's philosophical history research. However, his staging definition of metaphysics in this period was not very accurate, and he did not have any special understanding and in-depth analysis of the nature and characteristics of metaphysics and its changes in this period. Although Feng Youlan's understanding of the academic and ideological changes in China during the Wei, Jin, and Northern and Southern Dynasties period was more advanced than Hu Shi's, the influence of Hu Shi can still be seen in it, because Feng Youlan then shifted the focus of his discussion to Buddhism, using the chapter title "Buddhism in the Northern and Southern Dynasties and the Controversy over Buddhism at that time", so that in the definition of time period, he would define the term "Xuanxue" and "Buddhism" as well as the term "Buddhism". In this way, "metaphysics" and "Buddhism" were categorized in the same period of the North and South Dynasties, and it was believed that "during the North and South Dynasties, there was a great change in the Chinese intellectual circles. It was during this time that Buddhist thought was systematically imported, and the Chinese were able to gain a deep understanding of it. Since then, up to the beginning of the Song Dynasty, the first-rate thinkers in China were all Buddhist scholars."[8] This is the first time that a Buddhist scholar has been recognized in China. [8] This assessment is almost identical to that of Hu Shi, which emphasizes that the reason for the significant changes in Chinese thought during the Northern and Southern Dynasties was the importation of Buddhism as a foreign culture, and that from then on until the beginning of the Song Dynasty, China's first-rate thinkers were all Buddhist scholars. It is true that the period in which Buddhism played a significant role in Chinese thought was the period of the North and South Dynasties, but in order to emphasize the status and influence of Buddhism, it affected the understanding and evaluation of metaphysics, and even induced the misplacement of metaphysics into the period of the North and South Dynasties, which could not help but say that Feng Youlan shared the same cognitive limitations with Hu Shi in the view of metaphysics, i.e., over-emphasis on the status of Buddhism "obscured" the understanding of metaphysics. This is to say that Feng Youlan and Hu Shi have the same cognitive limitations in their views on metaphysics, that is, they over-emphasized the status of Buddhism and "obscured" the understanding of metaphysics.

However, Feng Youlan's study of metaphysics has several points that deserve to be recognized: First, he was the first to point out that Guo Xiang's "Notes on Chuang Tzu" is an independent and valuable work, and is an important text in Taoist philosophy, and he made a systematic interpretation of Guo Xiang's philosophy. Secondly, he pointed out that Wang Bi's Commentary on the Book of Changes "greatly opened the trend of commenting on the scriptures with Taoism," and thought that He Yan and Wang Bi "were quite capable of giving a more systematic account of Taoist doctrine." The third is his interpretation of He Yan's Theory of Tao and Theory of Namelessness, that He Yan "said, "But Tao is nothing, not concrete, so it can be found in all groups of people, but Tao is nameless, so it can be found in all names of the world", which explains Laozi's statement that "everything in heaven and earth is born from everything, and everything is born from nothing", which is an interpretation of Laozi's statement that "everything in heaven and earth is born from everything", which is an interpretation of Laozi's statement that "everything in heaven and earth is born from nothing". This explains the statement of Laozi that "everything in heaven and earth is born from existence, and existence is born from nothing", which is a play on the thought of Laozi. This shows that Feng Youlan has begun to interpret He Yan's development of Laozi's thought from the concepts of the new theory of reality about ****phase and different phase, general and special, that is, he explains "something is born from nothing" from the logical rather than from the generative relationship. Feng Youlan thinks that Wang Bi and He Yan share the same viewpoint in interpreting the saying that "something is born from nothing", and believes that Wang Bi uses the relationship of "body and use" to interpret the meaning of "nothing" and "nothingness". and "nothingness" in terms of the relationship between "body and use". (ibid., pp. 76-78) These views provide important clues to Tang Yutong's metaphysical studies. Originally known for his work on Buddhism, Tang devoted fifteen years (1922-1937) to the history of Buddhism, completing his History of Buddhism in the Han, Wei, Jin, and North and South Dynasties in 1937. In the next ten years of his academic practice, Tang Yutong further realized the relationship between metaphysics and Buddhism, and in the process of solving this problem, he created a new field of study called "Wei and Jin Metaphysics". Through the study of Buddhism and then metaphysics, Tang corrected the tendency of people to neglect metaphysics by emphasizing Buddhism. From then on, Wei and Jin metaphysics as a relatively independent discipline in the history of Chinese philosophy, thought, and culture has gained its due academic status, and has been highly valued by scholars.

The reason why Tang Yutong can be in the same generation of scholars did not pay attention to the academic field of unique vision, a unique way, one of the important reasons is that his attitude and method of cultural research, cultural exchanges, conflict and reconciliation issues have in-depth thinking. Tang Yutong wrote an article entitled "Conflict and Reconciliation of Cultural Ideas", which borrowed the research results of cultural anthropology on cultural transplantation and applied them to the level of ideas, neither agreeing with the extreme "evolutionary theory" that "ideas are produced by the nation or the state and have nothing to do with foreign cultural ideas", nor agreeing with the extreme "evolutionary theory" that "ideas are produced by the nation or the state, and have nothing to do with foreign cultural ideas". Nor do we agree with the extreme "evolutionary theory", which states that "a cultural idea is always influenced by foreign influence in its origin, and foreign ideas can always completely change its original character and direction", and we agree with the extreme "evolutionary theory", which states that "a foreign culture is not the same as a foreign culture". He agrees with the extreme "broadcasting theory", and agrees with the views of the "critics" and "functionalists", who "think that the contact between foreign and local cultures results in two sides rather than one side". Based on this viewpoint, Tang believes that when foreign culture comes into contact with local culture, it must go through the process of conflict and reconciliation, so that the foreign culture can take root and play a role in the local community. He uses the example of the introduction of Indian Buddhism into China to illustrate that a foreign culture must undergo a great deal of change in order to adapt to the local Chinese culture and become Chinese Buddhism before it can be widely accepted by the Chinese people. He emphasized that "in this process, those that are the same as China's can continue to develop, while those that are different from China's tend to be short-lived and cannot last long." From this, he came to an important conclusion: "The cultural thought of a country has its own characteristics, and foreign cultural thought must be changed to conform to the nature of another culture in order to be effective."[9] In the early years of China, he emphasized that "in this process, the same and different from China can continue to develop, while the different from China is often short-lived and cannot last. [9] In the period of Wei and Jin, Buddhism is a foreign culture, while metaphysics is the typical form of Chinese local culture, Buddhism must be dependent on metaphysics, in order to be accepted by Chinese intellectuals and the general public, in order to be developed in China. In order to clarify the process of reconciling the conflict between Buddhism and metaphysics, it is necessary to further clarify the theoretical roots and academic nature of metaphysics itself, so it is a logical development process for the study of Buddhism to enter into the study of metaphysics. Only in this way can the process of the Chineseization of Buddhism be further explained. This can be better illustrated by Tang Yutong's important thesis "A Brief Discussion on the Flow of Metaphysics in the Wei and Jin Dynasties" written in 1940, which compares the thoughts of the metaphysicians in the Wei and Jin Dynasties with the teachings of the Buddhists in order to illustrate the similarities and differences and the interconnections between the two and finally concludes: "Wang Bi's commentary on the "Lao" and the exposition of the doctrine of the noble no, and Guo Guo's interpretation of the "Chuang" and the the theories of the lofty yes, all of them are invented on the inherent scholarship of China and are therefore very influential, and Shi Shi's interpretation of the "Zhuang" and the theory of the lofty yes. Therefore, their influence was very wide, and they were also very much in favor of their style of interpretation. And the first monk Zhao solution empty, although quite interesting to talk about the metaphysics, but its contempt for the old Zhuang, convinced that the Buddha multiplied, but also a few breakthroughs in the barrier of metaphysics carry on." [10] This shows that Buddhism is first dependent on the metaphysics to develop, and the emergence of monk Zhao thought is both the Wei and Jin metaphysics of inheritance and development, but also the beginning of the Chineseization of Buddhism.

Tang Yutong's study of the metaphysics of the Wei and Jin dynasties continues to implement his rigorous academic style of Buddhist studies, which focuses on historical facts. This research seems to have two paths close to the problem, one is through the emergence of Buddhism in China, the evolution of the process of research, found that the relationship between Buddhism and metaphysics, and then produce metaphysics as an independent object of study, which is the process of backward thrust, one is through the metaphysics of China's inherent academic natural evolution of the process of how to form the research, found that the time of the Han and Wei China's academics have been very great changes, and then establish a unique academic character of metaphysics, which is the unique academic character of the Han and Wei dynasties. This is the process of evolution. We can explore the process and achievements of Tang Yutong's metaphysics research according to the order and publication time of his papers in Wei and Jin Metaphysics Manuscripts. Firstly, by reading Liu Shao's "Characters of the Three Kingdoms", Tang Yutong discovered the process and reasons for the academic changes at the end of Han and the beginning of Jin, and then pointed out that the doctrines of metaphysicians in the beginning of the period had already begun to detach themselves from concrete people and things, and had become a kind of "doctrine of form. [11] Then he published an important paper in 1940, "A Brief Discussion on the Flow of Metaphysics in Wei and Jin", which further clarified that the fundamental difference between Wei and Jin metaphysics and the Han Dynasty was that the metaphysics of Wei and Jin "was no longer confined to the external use of the universe, and went on to discuss the essence of heaven and earth and all things. In the Han Dynasty, the Tao of Heaven was put into physics. The Wei and Jin Dynasties deposed the Way of Heaven and investigated the essence, and returned to the metaphysical pole with the few against the many; they forgot the image and traveled outside the object. Thus, the theory of Cosmology or Cosmogony of Han Dynasty was separated from the theory of Ontology or Theory of Being, and remained in the survival of the original truth." [12] He pointed out that the "Wu" of He Yan and Wang Bi's thesis of "taking Wu as the basis" is "the Substance of the Unpairing" and "the totality of the Way". is the totality of the Way" (ibid. (ibid., p. 43) This establishes the academic nature and status of Wei and Jin metaphysics as an ontology in the history of Chinese philosophy. Not only this, Tang Yutong further studied the characteristics of Wei and Jin metaphysics in the academic method, he pointed out in his important thesis "Discussion of Words and Meanings" [13], which was completed in 1942, that "although the rise of new scholarship is due to the environment of the time and the wind, without a new vision and a new method, there is only a fragmented and fragmented speech, and there can not be a well-organized new science. " [14] This new method is the "discernment of words and meanings". He believed that, firstly, the discernment of words and meanings is like "Okun's razor", which can remove the confusion of Han; secondly, the discernment of words and meanings is the intrinsic requirement of metaphysics as a kind of ontology; thirdly, the method of forgetting one's own words in the discernment of words and meanings can "integrate the studies of Confucianism and Taoism"; fourthly, the discernment of words and meanings can "integrate the studies of Confucianism and Taoism"; fourthly, the discernment of words and meanings can "integrate the studies of Confucianism and Taoism". Fourthly, the discernment of meaning is not only a matter of theoretical method, but also a matter of practice in the life of Wei and Jin scholars. Tang Yongtong advocated: "Anyone who wants to understand the doctrines of a school in China must first know the purpose of their own behavior." "The famous scholars of the Wei and Jin dynasties talked about reasoning, although there are differences, but their purpose is not committed to useless words, and has nothing to do with life. Qingtai is not an empty talk, and metaphysics also has its own use." "And the theoretical distinction between words and meanings is greatly helpful to the practical distinction between God and form." [15] Through the elaboration of the academic method of Wei and Jin metaphysics, Tang Yutong combined it with the method of thinking that best reflects the philosophical characteristics of metaphysics, i.e., the abstract "discernment of the existence of the body with or without the body," and with the socio-political issues that were of most concern at that time, i.e., "the name religion and nature. The most concerned socio-political issues of the time, i.e., "the discernment between religion and nature", as well as with the most personal life of the Wei-Jin scholars, i.e., "the discernment between the form and the spirit", constitute a more complete basic framework of metaphysical research.

Tang Yutong's study of metaphysics in the Wei and Jin dynasties not only points out the academic nature of metaphysics and its methodology, but also further examines the flow of metaphysics and its influence on the later generations of scholars. About the flow of Wei and Jin metaphysics, Tang Yutong has a basic point of view that determines his method of research and judgment, and this point of view is more completely and accurately embodied in a speech he made in 1947, "The Development of Wei and Jin Thought". He thought: "Metaphysics is a natural evolution from the inherent Chinese academics, from the past thought at any time to perform the 'new meaning', gradually become a system, metaphysics and Indian Buddhism in the theoretical relationship is not inevitable, in other words, Buddhism is not a metaphysical growth of the proper cause. On the contrary, Buddhism was baptized by metaphysics before this foreign idea could be accepted by our people. Therefore, from one aspect, Buddhism in the Wei and Jin Dynasties can also be said to be metaphysics. And it is incontrovertible that Buddhism contributed to the metaphysics." (ibid., p. 112) Therefore, as far as the Wei and Jin dynasties are concerned, Tang Yutong considered Buddhism within the system of metaphysics. As can be seen in "A Brief Discussion of the Streams of Metaphysics in the Wei and Jin Dynasties" and subsequent discussions, on the one hand, he gradually separated metaphysics from the entanglement of Buddhism and metaphysics, and gradually described the trajectory of the independent development of metaphysics, and on the other hand, he gradually deepened his grasp of the external characteristics of the streams of Buddhism from the simple temporal segmentation and the influences of each stream of Buddhism to the analysis of the theoretical characteristics of the streams of Buddhism and their intrinsic logical correlations. Tang Yutong's study of the changes and schools of metaphysics in the Wei and Jin dynasties provided an important clue for later scholars to study the development process of Wei and Jin metaphysics in a way that harmonizes history and logic.

Regarding the turnaround of Wei and Jin thought and its influence on later scholarship, Tang Yutong gave some hints in his article "Xie Lingyun's Discussions on Zongs" (谢灵运〈辨宗論》書後) written in 1945. Tang pointed out that since the Han and Wei dynasties, the ideal of saints, i.e., whether saints could be learned or attained, had been discussed, and Xie Lingyun hinted that there were two major opposing views on this issue in his Discourse on the Discernment of Zongs: the Chinese tradition claimed that saints were unlearnable and unattainable, and the Indian tradition claimed that saints could be learned and attained, and Xie Lingyun adopted Zhu Dawson's "enlightenment" to reconcile the two different views, claiming that saints were not learned or attained. Xie Ling Yun adopted Zhu Daosheng's "epiphany" to reconcile the two different views, and advocated that saints could not be learned but could be attained, showing a major shift in Wei and Jin thinking, which not only succeeded the Zen school of Sui and Tang, but also created the precedent of the saints of Song and Ming philosophies that they could be learned but could be attained. (ibid., pp. 96-102) Tang Yutong's research on the history of philosophy pays much attention to the "traces of change" of the times, and his study of Liu Shao's "Characters" and Wang Bi's "Dyan theory" reveals the transition from Han Dynasty Confucianism to Wei and Jin Metaphysics. His study of Liu Shao's "Characteristics" and Wang Bi's "Great Diffusion" revealed the transition from Han Dynasty Confucianism to Wei and Jin Metaphysics, and his study of Xie Ling Yun's "Discussion of Zong" revealed the transition from Wei and Jin Metaphysics to Sui and Tang Buddhism, and Song and Ming Ethics, which showed his academic characteristics of treating the interrupted history of philosophy or the history of specialization.

The study of Wei and Jin metaphysics in the 1930s and 40s of the 20th century, under the efforts of scholars such as Tang Yutong and Feng Youlan, relied on their deep understanding of traditional Chinese culture, and with the help of Western academic concepts and methods, to establish a basic modern academic form, laying a solid foundation for further research.

Third, the 1950s and 1970s

After 1949, Marxism gradually became the mainstream of Chinese social ideology and zeitgeist. The five-volume "General History of Chinese Thought", co-authored by Hou Weilu, is an important result of systematic organization and research of ancient Chinese thought using Marxist viewpoints and methods, of which the third volume of "Wei, Jin, and North and South Dynasties Thought", the first draft of which was completed in 1949, was written by Hou Weilu. Hou Weilu's study of Wei and Jin thought from the perspective of the history of thought is a synthesis of philosophical thought, logical thought and social thought of the period, emphasizing the social and economic composition of the period and the study of the socio-political and economic status of the metaphysicians. Hou Weilu also noticed that Feng Youlan's A History of Chinese Philosophy was brief in its discussion of the philosophical thought of the two Han, Wei, Jin, and North and South Dynasties. [16] Therefore, he has made more efforts on the citation of historical documents and the excavation of archaeological data, and has also made a greater expansion on the specific content of the exposition, such as discussing the turn to the Wei and Jin Qingtai of the Qingtai of the late Han Dynasty of the gentry and the scholarly families, discussing the main schools of metaphysics in Wei and Jin Dynasties, respectively, Guo Zhuzhuang's doubtful case, elaborating on Jikang's dualism and its connection with the activities of anti-Shimazi Jin, discussing Ge Hong's Taoist thought and his beliefs in Confucianism and Immortalism, and the idea that the Taoism of the Immortals and the Taoism of the Immortals and the Taoism of the Immortals and the Taoism of the Immortals were based on Confucianism. He also discusses the significance of Ge Hong's Taoist thought of the immortals and the controversy over the extinction of the gods and the immortality of the gods against the background of Buddhism. He also explores the economic and political roots of Wei and Jin metaphysics from the perspective of the relationship between feudal politics, feudal economy and ideology, such as analyzing the contractual dissociation of Wei and Jin ideology from the contractual dissociation of the famous families of the Wei and Jin, and exploring the economic and political roots of Wei and Jin metaphysics. This kind of consciously and even deliberately introduced the Marxist viewpoint and method into the study of Wei and Jin metaphysics, which produced a unique effect in the early stage of the study, especially in linking the philosophical and ideological issues with the socio-political and economic backgrounds, and deepened people's understanding of the issues.

However, because this kind of research has a certain direct political purpose from the very beginning, it is regarded as an ideological and theoretical struggle that is bound to take place in the process of combining Marxism with the reality of the Chinese revolution. (Ibid., p. 221) At the same time, the style of writing is full of polemics, so this kind of research inevitably has a tendency to be simple and biased. What is particularly serious is that this study shows a strong rejection and denial of the studies of other scholars in the 1930s and 1940s. For example, the study thinks that "the recent scholars of the Qing Dynasty for the defense of the metaphysics, quite for the metaphysics of the sermonizer, some say it is 'hundreds of years of spiritual liberation, personality and ideological freedom', compared to the Western history of the Renaissance ideas; some say that the beauty of the personality of the Jin people, making him 'get the most unprecedented and unprecedented'. Some say that the beauty of Jin people's personality made him 'get the unprecedented spiritual liberation'; some say that Wei and Jin thought represents the naturalism of spiritual freedom; some say that Wei and Jin metaphysics is the most subtle of the internal and external king's science; some say that it is the greatest ontology in the history of Chinese thought. All these assertions are prejudices." [17] Since this kind of research is negative to almost all the scholars who hold a positive attitude towards the cultural and philosophical value of Wei and Jin metaphysics, its direct negation of Wei and Jin metaphysics is also inevitable.

In 1947, Zhdanov, a Soviet ideological expert, proposed a definition of the object of study of the history of philosophy, saying: "The history of scientific philosophy is the history of the embryo, occurrence, and development of the scientific materialist worldview and its law base. Since materialism grows and develops out of the struggle with idealism, the history of philosophy is the history of the struggle between materialism and idealism

.