On the Atheistic Implications of Song Dynasty Neo-Confucianism

Religion is essentially irrational, because religion cannot be demonstrated through reason. However, it is also human nature to seek logical confirmation for everything. Therefore, in order to rationalize belief in ghosts and spirits, thinkers subjected them to philosophical reflection. Yet this, to a large extent, caused a backlash against belief itself. Such is the case with Neo-Confucianism. As Confucians, the Neo-Confucians held an unwavering faith in the deities of traditional Confucian religion. Their introduction of philosophy and construction of the doctrine of the Way [dao] was mainly aimed at better and more clearly explaining ghosts and spirits, as well as the mechanism of communication between ghosts/spirits and humans. However, this inevitably created a conflict between philosophy and religion. That is to say, on another level, the actual effect of the Neo-Confucians’ activity of constructing the Way was to realize the disenchantment of the natural world, dissolve the independence of ghosts and spirits, and promote the development of atheism.

宗教本质上是非理性的，因为宗教无法通过理性来论证。然而，凡事要通过逻辑确证，又是人的本性使然。因此，为了使鬼神信仰合理化，思想家们于是对其进行了哲学思考。但是，这在很大程度上造成了对信仰的反噬。理学就是如此。作为儒者，理学家们对传统儒教神灵的信仰笃信不疑。他们引入哲学，建构道论的目的，主要是为了更好、更清晰地解释鬼神以及鬼神与人的交流机制。然而，这必然会造成哲学与宗教的冲突。也就是说，在另一个层面上，理学家的造道行为产生的实际作用，其实实现了对自然界的祛魅化，消解了鬼神的独立性，推动了无神论的发展。

I. The Neo-Confucian View of Sacrificial Rites and Ghosts/Spirits

一、理学家的祭祀观与鬼神观

In Chinese history, there has never existed thoroughgoing atheism, because thoroughgoing atheism is a product of the high development of epistemology and also a result of the high development of science and technology. Therefore, the claim that Song Dynasty Neo-Confucianism has atheistic implications is made with regard to the process of the development of atheism, and it is not a result that the Neo-Confucians consciously and willingly promoted. As Confucians, the Neo-Confucians’ belief in sacrificial rites and ghosts/spirits was actually very firm. Only by first understanding this can we have a clear and logically consistent understanding of the atheistic implications of Song Dynasty Neo-Confucianism.

在我国历史上并不存在彻底的无神论，因为彻底的无神论是认识论高度发展的产物，也是科学技术水平高度发展的结果。所以，宋代理学有无神论意蕴，是就无神论发展之过程而言的，并且不是理学家们自觉自愿推动的结果。作为儒者的理学家们，对祭祀与鬼神的信念其实非常坚定。只有先理解这一点，我们才能对宋代理学的无神论意蕴有清晰而符合逻辑的认识。

1. The Neo-Confucian View of Sacrificial Rites

1.理学家的祭祀观

The great affairs of the state lie in sacrifice and war. [1]1 The *Hetu* (Yellow River Chart) and *Luoshu* (Luo River Writing) are mythical diagrams said to have been revealed by a dragon-horse and a spirit-turtle, respectively, to the sage-kings Fuxi and Yu; they are foundational to the cosmology of the *Yijing* (Book of Changes). Placing equal emphasis on sacrifice and military affairs is a Confucian tradition. The Neo-Confucians could only inherit this tradition, and they became even more meticulous about the importance and standardization of sacrificial rites.

国之大事，在祀与戎。将祭祀与军事并重，这是儒家的传统。理学家只能继承这一传统，并且对祭礼的重要性与规范性更加讲究。

In 1068, Zhou Dunyi wrote the text “Essay on the Offering of Vegetables for the Relocation of the School in Shaozhou,” specifically reporting to Yan Hui [2]2 Kong Anguo (c. 156–c. 74 BCE) was a Confucian scholar of the Western Han dynasty; the “nine categories” (jiu chou) refer to the nine divisions of the *Great Plan* (Hongfan) chapter of the *Shangshu* (Book of Documents). that the relocation of the Confucian temple was complete and inviting Yan Hui to be the attendant deity of Confucius. He declared with extreme piety: “I, Zhou Dunyi, Court Gentleman for Manifest Virtue, Vice Director of the Bureau of Equipment in the Department of State Affairs, Controller-General of Yongzhou Military Prefecture and Concurrently Supervisor of Agriculture, Acting Prefect of Shaozhou Military Prefecture, Supreme Commandant of Elite Cavalry, Bestowed with the Fish Pouch in Purple, dare to announce clearly to the Former Teacher, Duke of Yanguo, Yanzi: Now that the relocation and repair of the temple and school are complete, I reverently perform the offering of vegetables to the Former Sage, the Ultimate Sage and Civilizing King. … I respectfully present ritual gifts, water plants, and artemisia, formally display the bright offering, and accompany the sacrifice to the attendant deity.”

周敦颐曾于1068年著《邵州迁学释菜文》一文，专门向颜回报告孔庙迁徙完成，并邀请颜回做孔子的配祀。他极为虔诚地祭告说:“朝奉郎尚书驾部员外郎、通判永州军州兼管内劝农事、权发遣邵州军州事、上骑都尉赐绯鱼袋周敦颐敢昭告于先师兖国公颜子:爰以迁修庙学成，恭修释菜于先圣至圣文宣王。……谨以礼币藻蘋，式陈明献，从祀配神。”

During a discussion, Cheng Yi once approved of Wang Anshi’s [3]3 Zhou Dunyi (1017–1073) was a Northern Song philosopher whose Diagram of the Supreme Ultimate became a foundational text for Neo-Confucian cosmology. re-standardization of sacrificial rituals. He said: “Our dynasty matched the Supreme Ancestor [4]4 The Five Phases (wuxing) are Metal, Wood, Water, Fire, and Earth, a traditional Chinese cosmological scheme for categorizing natural phenomena and their interactions. in the Circular Mound, and matched the Deceased Father [5]5 Zhang Shi (1133–1180) was a Southern Song Neo-Confucian philosopher, a contemporary of Zhu Xi, associated with the “School of the Way.” in the Bright Hall. Only since Jiefu’s [6]6 “Sacrifice as if present” (ji ru zai) is a phrase from the Analects (3.12), where Confucius says “Sacrifice as if present; sacrifice to the spirits as if the spirits are present.” proposal has this been correct. Previously, sacrifices were made to the Five Emperors, and also to the August Lord of Heaven on High, with six positions for those matched. Since Jiefu’s proposal, only the August Lord of Heaven on High is sacrificed to, with the Deceased Father as the match” (Collected Works of the Cheng Family, “Explanation of the Di Sacrifice”). This passage discusses who should be the matching deity when sacrificing to the Lord on High. Rituals are not eternal; based on different understandings, there will be continuous adjustments in actual practice. But this passage shows that Wang Anshi, Cheng Yi, and others were consistent in their meticulousness regarding the standardization of sacrificial rites. Cheng Yi even personally wrote the essay “Method for Making Spirit Tablets,” specifically standardizing the method for making spirit tablets used in folk sacrifices.

程颐曾在一次讨论中，赞成王安石对祭祀礼仪的重新规范。他说:“本朝以太祖配于圜丘，以祢配于明堂，自介甫此议方正。先此祭五帝，又祭昊天上帝，并配者六位。自介甫议，惟祭昊天上帝，以祢配之”(《程氏文集·禘说》)。这段话讨论的是，祭祀上帝要以谁来配祀。礼仪并非是永恒的，根据不同的理解，在实际操作上会有不断调整。但这段话表明，王安石、程颐等对祭祀规范性的讲究是一致的。程颐甚至亲自写《作主式》一文，专门规范了民间祭祀用神主的制作方法。

Zhang Zai strongly advocated for the orthodoxy of sacrifice. The Cases of Song and Yuan Scholars states that he “worried that in recent times, funeral and sacrificial rites lacked proper standards; for mourning periods of one year and below, there were no changes in mourning garments; the rites for offering to ancestors followed vulgar customs. Therefore, he consistently advocated following ancient rites” (Cases of Song and Yuan Scholars, “Case of Hengqu, Part One”). In the tenth year of the Xining reign period (1077), because the ritual officials conducted the suburban sacrifice not according to ancient methods, Zhang Zai submitted a memorial criticizing this. Because his opinion was not adopted, he resolutely resigned from office and retired into seclusion.

张载非常主张祭祀的正统性。《宋元学案》称他“患近世丧祭无法，期功以下未有衰麻之变，祀先之礼袭用流俗，于是一循古礼为倡”(《宗元学案·横渠学案上》)。熙宁十年(1077年)，因为礼官行郊礼不按古法，张载陈疏批评，因意见不被采纳，毅然辞官归隐。

Zhu Xi especially emphasized the grassroots promotion of sacrificial rites. The first chapter of his Family Rituals is “The Ancestral Hall,” which begins: “When a gentleman is about to build a house, he first establishes the ancestral hall to the east of the main sleeping quarters. He makes four niches to enshrine the spirit tablets of the former generations.” “If there is a flood, fire, or bandit attack, first rescue the ancestral hall, move the spirit tablets and surviving writings, next the sacrificial vessels, and then the family property.” This is to treat the spirit tablets of ancestors with the attitude of “serving the dead as if serving the living.” According to ancient regulations, ordinary commoners were not allowed to establish temples. But after Zhu Xi introduced the ancestral hall, he changed the tradition that only nobles and meritorious relatives could enjoy sacrifices in family temples. The Neo-Confucians’ tireless efforts to strengthen the importance of sacrificial rites are evident from this.

朱熹更是强调祭礼的基层推广，所著《家礼》的第一篇就是《祠堂》，开篇曰:“君子将营宫室，先立祠堂与正寝之东。为四龛，以奉先世神主。”“或有水火盗贼，则先救祠堂，迁神主、遗书，次及祭器，然后及家财。”这就是以“事死如事生”的态度对待祖先的牌位。按古制，普通庶人是不能立庙的。但朱熹推出祠堂之后，一改以往非贵族勋戚不得享祭家庙的传统,理学家不遗余力强化祭祀重要性的努力可见一斑。

The Neo-Confucians’ emphasis on sacrificial rites was, first, out of compliance with the inertia of the Confucian tradition. Sacrifice is a basic tenet of Confucian thought, so a pure Confucian would take the complete practice of sacrificial rites as a pursuit. For example, Zigong [7]7 Chen Chun (1159–1223) was a disciple of Zhu Xi and a key transmitter of his thought. thought that the ritual of announcing the first day of the month had been abandoned and suggested it was unnecessary to continue using a live sheep for the sacrifice. But Confucius opposed this, saying: “Ci [Zigong], you love the sheep; I love the ritual” (Analects, “Ba Yi” [8]8 Wang Xiang (185–269) was a figure from the Three Kingdoms period, famous for his filial piety. The story of “lying on the ice to get carp” (wo bing qiu li) describes how he lay on a frozen river to melt the ice with his body heat so he could catch carp for his stepmother, a miracle attributed to his filial sincerity.). What Confucius valued was the feeling for the ritual itself as the subject; this is a manifestation of the purity of the Confucian.

理学家对祭礼的重视，首先是出于对儒家传统之惯性的顺应。祭祀是儒家思想的基本要义，因此纯粹的儒者会把对祭礼的完整实践作为追求。比如子贡认为告朔之礼已废，建议不必再用活羊祭祀。但孔子反对说:“赐也，尔爱其羊，我爱其礼”(《论语·八佾》)。孔子讲究的是对礼本身的主体的感情，这就是儒者纯粹性的表现。

Second, the Neo-Confucians’ emphasis on sacrificial rites was out of the need to maintain the stability of ethical society. Zhu Xi said: “The Di sacrifice is a great sacrifice; within it there is the righteousness of ruler and minister, and the affection of father and son” (Classified Conversations of Master Zhu, “Analects, Part Seven, Ba Yi Chapter”). The ethics of “the affection of father and son” is manifested in practice as ancestor worship, aimed at maintaining the stability of ethical society. The Neo-Confucians directly participated in discussions on ancestor sacrifice issues. During the Northern Song, Confucians debated whether it was necessary to establish the Xi Ancestor [9]9 The School of the Mind (xinxue) is a major branch of Neo-Confucianism, associated especially with Lu Jiuyuan (1139–1193) and later Wang Yangming (1472–1529), which emphasizes the primacy of the mind-heart (xin) over external principle (li). as an imperishable ancestor. The Xi Ancestor was Zhao Tiao, the great-great-grandfather of Zhao Kuangyin, [10]10 The three dukes (sangong) were the highest-ranking officials in imperial China. a man of the Tang Dynasty. Because he was distant from the Song, some at the time wanted to make Zhao Tiao a removed ancestor. Cheng Yi and Wang Anshi both thought this inappropriate, and Zhu Xi also agreed to make the Xi Ancestor an imperishable ancestor. Because ancestors are the source of everything; for the state, they are the source of supreme power. Therefore, emphasizing sacrifice means emphasizing the stability of ethical society.

其次，理学家对祭礼的重视，是出于维系伦理社会之稳定的需要。朱熹说:“禘是个大祭，那里有君臣之义，有父子之亲”(《朱子语类·论语七·八佾篇》)。“父子之亲”的伦理，在实践上表现为祖先崇拜，目的在于维系伦理社会的稳定，理学家会直接参与祖先祭祀问题的讨论。北宋时，儒者们曾对是否需要立僖祖为不祧有过讨论。僖祖即赵朓，是赵匡胤的高祖，唐朝时人。因为去宋久远，当时有人要以赵朓为祧祖。程颐、王安石都认为不妥，朱熹也赞成以僖祖为不祧。因为祖先是一切的源头，就国家而言，是最高权力的源头。所以说，重视祭祀，就是重视伦理社会的稳定。

Third, the Neo-Confucians’ emphasis on sacrificial rites was out of belief in traditional ghosts and spirits. Sacrifice is an interactive activity between subject and object; the subject is humans, the object is ghosts and spirits. If one does not believe in ghosts and spirits, the practice of sacrifice cannot be established. As Mozi said: “To hold that there are no ghosts and yet to learn sacrificial rites is like having no guests and yet learning the rites of hospitality” (Mozi, “Gong Meng”). Zhu Xi once explicitly criticized Ouyang Xixun’s [11]11 Chen Chun was a disciple of Zhu Xi and a major Neo-Confucian philosopher in his own right. denial of ghosts and spirits: “These words are especially harmful to principle. If this is the case, then it is merely hypocrisy. How could this be what is meant by ‘sincerity being irrepressible’?” (Collected Works, Volume 69, “Reply to Ouyang Xixun”). Therefore, the Neo-Confucians’ piety in sacrifice must be based on belief in ghosts and spirits.

其次，理学家对祭礼的重视，是出于对传统鬼神的信仰。祭祀是一种主客体的交互活动，主体是人，客体是鬼神，如果不信仰鬼神，祭祀实践是不能成立的。如墨子说:“执无鬼而学祭礼，是犹无客而学客礼也”(《墨子·公孟》)。朱熹曾明确批评欧阳希逊否定鬼神的说法:“此言尤害理，若如此说，则是伪而已矣，又岂所谓诚之不可掩乎?”(《文集》卷六十九《答欧阳希逊》)所以，理学家对祭祀的虔诚，必以鬼神信仰为基础。

2. The Neo-Confucian View of Ghosts and Spirits

2.理学家的鬼神观

Although sacrifice has multiple layers of practical significance, for its effective implementation, the view of ghosts and spirits is its basic core. The Neo-Confucians, who steadfastly performed sacrifices, had a firm belief in ghosts and spirits.

虽然祭祀有多层现实意义，但要使之有效落实，鬼神观是其基本内核。坚持虔诚祭祀的理学家们，对于鬼神有坚定的信仰。

Generally speaking, traditional Confucians all took “Sacrifice as if present, sacrifice to the spirits as if the spirits are present” (Analects, “Ba Yi”) as the principle of sacrifice. Although it cannot be determined that Confucius was the first to say this, it received Confucius’s approval, because this sentence established a proper norm for sacrifice. However, Zhu Xi maintained great vigilance regarding “sacrifice as if present” as a behavioral norm. Because this sentence can easily be further extended to mean “when not sacrificing to the spirits, the spirits do not exist.” This implies that ghosts and spirits are placed within a subjective will that can choose to accept or reject them. Zhu Xi transcended the normative level of understanding and saw the problem of the hollowing out of belief that mere norms could produce. For example, someone asked: “Master Fan [12]12 Mount Tai (Taishan) is one of the Five Sacred Mountains of Daoism, long associated with imperial sacrifices and popular religion. says: ‘If one has sincerity, then there are spirits; if one has no sincerity, then there are no spirits.’ I am afraid this means that if one’s own mind thinks they exist, they exist; if one thinks they do not exist, they do not exist.” Zhu Xi replied: “If one merely relies on one’s own mind thinking they exist, they exist; thinking they do not exist, they do not exist — this would be a matter of private intention. This is about what one owes to them. If one merely performs the sacrifice emptily here, and one’s sincerity does not reach them, it is as if one had not sacrificed at all” (Classified Conversations of Master Zhu, Volume 25). That is to say, if ghosts and spirits exist according to subjective will, then a sacrifice lacking sincerity would dissolve the object of sacrifice, and subsequently dissolve the meaning of sacrifice. Therefore, in Zhu Xi’s view, the existence of ghosts and spirits should not be a subjective issue, but an objective one.

一般来说，传统儒者都以“祭如在，祭神如神在”(《论语·八佾》)为祭祀原则。这句话虽然不能确定是孔子先讲的，但得到了孔子的肯定，因为这句话确立了一个当然的祭祀规范。然而，朱熹对“祭如在”作为一种行为规范，保持了非常的警惕。因为这句话易被进一步延伸出“不祭神的时候神就不存在”了。这意味着，鬼神被置于了可取舍的主观意愿之中。朱熹超越了规范层面的理解，看到了单纯的规范可能出现的信仰空心化问题。如有人问:“范氏云:‘有其诚则有其神，无其诚则无其神。’恐是自家心里以为有便有，以为无便无。”朱熹回答:“若只据自家以为有便有，无便无，如此却是私意了。这个乃是自家欠了他底，盖是自家空在这里祭，诚意却不达于彼，便如不曾祭相似”(《朱子语类》卷二十五)。也就是说，如果鬼神是根据主观意愿而存在的，那么没有诚意的祭祀，也就消解了祭祀对象，继而消解了祭祀的意义。所以，在朱熹看来，鬼神的存在不应是一个主观问题，而是客观问题。

Taking sacrifice as the center, Zhu Xi explained that reverent sacrifice is not a normative issue, but essentially a factual issue of the existence of ghosts and spirits. Other Confucians, however, more often emphasized the certainty of ghosts and spirits from a directly affirmative perspective. For example, Cheng Yi said: “The arrival of the spirits means that they descend to inspect and then bestow many blessings upon you” (Cheng’s Explanations of the Classics, Volume 4, “Explanation of the Odes, ‘Tian Bao’”). Zhang Shi said even more concisely: “If there are ghosts and spirits, then there are rites and music” (Explanation of the Analects, “Ba Yi”). Similarly, Zhu Xi also said: “When the ancient sages performed sacrifices for them, there must also have been their spirits” (Classified Conversations of Master Zhu, “Rites, Part Seven”). In short, sacrificial rites serve ghosts and spirits.

朱熹以祭祀为中心，讲明虔敬祭祀不是一个规范问题，本质上是一个鬼神存在的事实问题。而其他的儒者，更多的是从直接肯定的角度来强调鬼神的确定性。比如程颐说:“神之至，谓降鉴则锡尔多福”(《程氏经说》卷四《诗解·天保》)。张栻更言简意赅地说:“有是鬼神则有是礼乐”(《论语解·八佾》)。同样，朱熹也说:“古圣人为之祭祀，亦必有其神”(《朱子语类·礼七》)。简言之，祭礼是为鬼神服务的。

The Neo-Confucians also firmly believed in divination. Cheng Yi said: “Far beyond the six directions, near within one’s own body, brief as a moment, subtle as movement and stillness, there is nothing without the image of a hexagram, nothing without the meaning of a line” (Preface to the Book of Changes). Confucians such as Zhang Zai, Zhu Xi, and Zhang Shi all made statements expressing deep belief in divination.

对于占卜，理学家也是坚信的。程颐说:“远在六合之外，近在一身之中，暂于瞬息，微于动静，莫不有卦之象焉，莫不有爻之义焉”(《易序》)。张载、朱熹、张栻等儒者都对占卜有深信不疑的相关说法。

Apart from ghosts and spirits and divination, some Neo-Confucians also believed in mystical experiences. For example, Yang Jian of the Southern Song claimed that one night when he was twenty-eight, as he was pondering the ancestral precept of “constantly turning back to reflect,” he “suddenly felt that there was no inside or outside, no boundaries; the three powers [heaven, earth, and man], the ten thousand things, the ten thousand transformations, the ten thousand affairs, the hidden and the manifest, being and non-being, all merged into one body, without the slightest seam or gap” (Cihu yishu xuji, vol. 1, “Bing jiangshi qiuxun”). At thirty-one, Yang Jian met Lu Jiuyuan in Fuyang, who lectured on the original mind. After realizing it, he “suddenly felt this mind become clear and bright,” “could not sleep all night, and as dawn approached, he felt as if something had been shed, and this mind became even brighter” (Song-Yuan xue’an, “Cihu xue’an”). At thirty-three, while observing mourning for his mother, he had another mystical experience. “Previously, at the height of grief, I was also still and unmoving… I became even more convinced that my mind possesses this divine function and wondrous function” (Yangshi Yizhuan, vol. 20).

在鬼神、占卜外，理学家中也有信奉神秘体验的。比如南宋杨简，他自称在二十八岁时的一个晚上，当他正思考“时复反观”的祖训时，“忽觉空洞无内外、无际畔，三才、万物、万化、万事、幽明、有无，通为一体，略无缝罅”(《慈湖遗书续集》卷一《炳讲师求训》)。三十一岁时，杨简遇陆九渊在富阳讲本心，在体悟之后，“忽觉此心澄然清明”，“终夜不能寐，曈曈欲晓，洒然如有物脱去，此心益明”(《宋元学案·慈湖学案》)。三十三岁居母丧时，他再次获得神秘体验。“曩正哀恸时，乃亦寂然不动，……益信吾心有此神用妙用”(《杨氏易传》卷二十)。

Yang Jian’s mystical experience may be closely related to his proximity to Chan Buddhism. But “being and non-being are one substance,” “the hidden and the manifest share one principle,” “clear and bright,” “still and unmoving,” and so on, all have clues in traditional Confucian propositions. The difference is that ordinary philosophers expound this principle on a theoretical level, while Yang Jian realized it through mystical experience. In essence, he transformed what was originally a philosophical practice into a religious one.

杨简的神秘体验，或与他接近禅宗有密切关系。但“有无一体”“幽明一理”“澄然清明”“寂然不动”等在传统儒家命题中都能找到线索，只是一般哲学家是在理论的层面上阐释此理，而杨简则是在神秘体验上感悟此理。究其实质，是把原本的哲学工夫，转化为了宗教工夫。

II. Rational Critique and Theoretical Transformation of Ghosts and Spirits

二、对鬼神的理性批判与理论改造

The Neo-Confucians carried out a twofold task of destruction and construction regarding the traditional view of ghosts and spirits. On the one hand, they subjected the superstitious belief in ghosts and spirits prevalent in traditional society to a rational critique; on the other hand, they theoretically transformed the ghosts and spirits they themselves believed in. Although they had not yet reached the stage of thorough atheism, the transformed view of ghosts and spirits disenchanted belief in ghosts and spirits to the greatest extent possible.

理学家对传统鬼神观进行了一破一立两方面的工作。一方面对传统社会陷入迷信的鬼神信仰进行理性化的批判，另一方面又对自己信仰的鬼神进行理论化的改造。虽然他们尚未达到彻底无神论的阶段，但改造后的鬼神观在最大程度上为鬼神信仰进行了祛魅。

1. Rational Critique of Ghosts and Spirits

1.对鬼神的理性批判

The outstanding contribution of the Neo-Confucians to traditional thought lies first of all in their elevation of the value of reason. Regarding their understanding of ghosts and spirits, they resolutely opposed monstrous prodigies and evil spirits, rejected idol worship, and promoted the progress of human rational thought.

理学家对传统思想突出的贡献，首先在于高扬了理性价值。就其对鬼神的理解而言，他们坚决反对物怪神奸，摈弃偶像崇拜，推动了人类理性思维的进步。

Zhang Zai’s critique of monstrous prodigies and evil spirits was extremely fierce. He said: “Fan Xunzhi once spoke of prodigies and evil spirits. I argued against him, saying that the thunder, lightning, grass, and trees of heaven and earth are the strangest things, yet because they have a fixed form they are not considered strange; the pottery, chariots, and boats made by humans are also the strangest things, yet because they have a fixed principle they are not considered strange. Now, when people speak of ghosts, their form cannot be seen, and some say that those who have seen them are inconsistent—this is the first reason it is hard to believe. Furthermore, they are said to be formless yet able to transform tangible things—this cannot be inferred by principle—this is the second reason it is hard to believe… Now, when people today speak of ghosts and spirits, they say they are formless like heaven and earth, yet their actions are no different from humans. How can the ghost of a dead person possess both the abilities of heaven and humans? Let me further evaluate it from the perspective of common customs: if the dead all have consciousness, then a loving mother who deeply loves her son, once she has passed away, why does she not daily speak through people or entrust her dreams to console him? It is said that ghosts reward good and punish evil, yet sometimes a small evil receives a heavy punishment while a great villain enjoys abundant blessings—countless such cases exist. It is also said that ‘those with refined essence can become vengeful spirits.’ Why did the First Emperor of Qin not punish Zhao Gao, and why did Emperor Taizong of Tang not punish Empress Wu? It is also said that ‘what is widely transmitted by the masses cannot be entirely false.’ Why did the sages from ancient times not transmit a single word about it? Even if the sages sometimes remained silent, from Confucius and Mencius down to Xun Kuang, Yang Xiong, Fan Zhongyan, and Han Yu, none of them, though their learning did not reach that of the sages, ever said a word about it. If it is thought to exist, perhaps these several men happened not to speak of it; yet even among those today who are somewhat trustworthy and honest, no one has ever claimed to have personally seen it” (Xingli shiyi).

张载批判物怪神奸是极为猛烈的。他说:“范巽之尝言神奸物怪，某以言难之，谓天地之雷霆草木至怪也，以其有定形故不怪，人之陶冶舟车亦至怪也，以其有定理故不怪。今言鬼者不可见其形，或云有见者且不定，一难信;又以无形而移变有形之物，此不可以理推，二难信……今之言鬼神，以其无形则如天地，言其动作则不异于人，岂谓人死之鬼反能兼天人之能乎?今更就世俗之言评之:如人死皆有知，则慈母有深爱其子者，一旦化去，独不日日凭人言语托人梦寐存恤之耶?言能福善祸淫，则或小恶反遭重罚而大憝反享厚福，不可胜数。又谓‘人之精明者能为厉’，秦皇独不罪赵高，唐太宗独不罚武后耶?又谓‘众人所传不可全非’，自古圣人独不传一言耶?圣人或容不言，自孔孟而下，荀况、扬雄、范仲淹、韩愈，学亦未能及圣人，亦不见略言者。以为有，数子又或偶不言，今世之稍信实亦未尝有言亲见者”(《性理拾遗》)。

In Zhang Zai’s view, “monstrous prodigies and evil spirits” are fundamentally different from “ghosts and spirits.” What are called monstrous prodigies and evil spirits can be summarized by two characteristics: first, they can change from formless to formed, being a rare phenomenon; second, although formless, they can speak like humans, are refined, and can reward good and punish evil. The fundamental point of divergence between these two characteristics and the “ghosts and spirits” that Zhang Zai recognized is that they can have direct sensory contact and interaction with humans. Belief in such perceptible and tangible ghosts and spirits is fundamentally blind and irrational, hence “hard to believe.” He listed a series of facts, attempting to expose the internal contradictions in the existence of perceptible and knowable ghosts and spirits. For example, his refutation of the claim that “those with refined essence can become vengeful spirits” is very distinctive. The Zuo Commentary says that “Bo You became a vengeful spirit” because Bo You used things with abundant essence. The Cheng brothers and Zhu Xi all agreed with this, and later Confucian ritual also added the custom of sacrificing to vengeful spirits. But Zhang Zai took the opposite view, arguing that if using things with abundant essence could truly make one a vengeful spirit, why did the First Emperor of Qin not seek revenge against Zhao Hao? This refutation is very effective, directly negating the common people’s misunderstanding and superstition about ghosts and spirits. Therefore, Zhang Zai’s attitude of opposing monstrous prodigies and evil spirits reflects his strong rational spirit.

在张载看来，“物怪神奸”与“鬼神”是有本质区别的。所谓物怪神奸，可以概括为两个特点:其一，可以从无形变为有形，是一种罕见现象;其二，虽无形却能如人言语，精明而能福善祸淫。这两个特点与张载所认同的“鬼神”的根本分歧点在于，它们能与人有直接的感官联系与接触。对这样可感可触的鬼神之信仰，在根本上是盲目的、非理性的，故曰“难信”。他列举了一系列事实，尝试揭露可感可知之鬼神存在的内在矛盾。比如他反驳“人之精明者能为厉”一事非常的独树一帜。《左传》说“伯有为厉”，是因为伯有用物精多，二程、朱熹对此都表示赞同，后世儒教礼仪中也增入了祭祀厉鬼的习俗。但张载却反其道而行，认为，若用物精多真能为厉，何以秦皇不向赵高寻仇。这个反驳很有杀伤力，直接否定了世俗层面人们对鬼神的误解与迷信。所以，张载反对物怪神奸的态度，反映了他强烈的理性精神。

The Cheng brothers also fiercely criticized monstrous prodigies and evil spirits. Cheng Yi said: “The shaman is here, and the voice descends there; it is just thrown far away—there is definitely no such principle. It is also said that medicine is left behind—this is even more clearly not the case… Someone as intelligent as Shao Yaofu [Shao Yong] could not avoid doubting this. He once said that in some people’s homes, if one hears the sound of horses and men in the void, I say: since it is horses and men, there must be saddles and bridles and the like, all complete—where do these come from?” (Chengshi yishu, vol. 2, part 2). Cheng Yi’s critique of these two cases of monstrous prodigies and evil spirits follows the same logic as Zhang Zai’s. The logic of the first critique is: since ghosts and spirits are formless, how can they speak, or even leave behind tangible medicine? The logic of the second critique is: saddles and bridles are ordinary objects; how can they appear simultaneously with the horses and men in the void and become ghosts and spirits? In short, how can formless things do formed things, and how can formed things become formless ghosts? Therefore, they are all logically unreasonable.

二程对物怪神奸也有激烈的批判，他说:“师巫在此，降言在彼，只是抛得远，决无此理。又言留下药，尤知其不然。……聪明如邵尧夫，犹不免致疑，在此尝言，有人家若虚空中闻人马之声。某谓:既是人马，须有鞍鞯之类皆全，这个是何处得来”(《程氏遗书》卷二下)。程颐对此两条物怪神奸的批判，与张载的逻辑是一致的。第一条的批判逻辑是，鬼神既然无形，又如何能说话，甚至留下有形的药物?第二条的批判逻辑是，鞍辔之类乃普通物品，为何能与虚空中的人马同时出现，成为鬼神?简言之，无形之物如何能做有形之事，有形之物如何能变为无形之鬼，因此它们在逻辑上都是不合理的。

The Cheng brothers criticized many other monstrous prodigies and evil spirits. For example, people in Sizhou spread a rumor that a sage had descended from heaven. Cheng Yi refuted this by pointing out that people’s descriptions of him were all different. Zhu Ding, the prefect of Sizhou, worshipped Sengjia as a spirit that could ward off fire. Cheng Yi refuted this by asking why he did not throw it into the fire to test it. The essence of monstrous prodigies and evil spirits is the supernatural, that is, a violation of logic. Although logic cannot explain everything, those things that are clearly illogical should be fiercely criticized and their absurdity exposed. This vividly reflects the elevated rational spirit of the Neo-Confucians.

二程批判的物怪神奸还有许多，比如泗州人传言天降圣人，程颐以众人之描述皆异来驳斥之;泗州守官朱定奉僧伽为避火神物，程颐以何不投火试之以驳斥之。物怪神奸的本质是超自然，也就是违背逻辑的。虽然逻辑不能解释一切，但那些明显逻辑不通的事物，就应该要极力批判，揭露其荒谬性，这生动反映了理学家们高扬的理性精神。

Opposing idol worship was also a manifestation of the Neo-Confucians’ elevation of rationalism. Idol worship is a remnant of primitive religion. Although the Neo-Confucians believed in natural spirits, they resolutely opposed making statues of natural spirits, standing in sharp opposition to vulgar customs. Zhang Zai said: “The sacrifice to mountains and rivers is only because they are so toweringly high, so profoundly deep, so moist and steaming that they can produce clouds and bring rain. One must repay them, so they are sacrificed to as equals of the three dukes and feudal lords. How could there ever be a human image of them! When a sage governs, he must eliminate this” (Jingxue liku, “Jisi”).

反对偶像崇拜，也是理学家高扬理性主义的表现之一。偶像崇拜是原始宗教的遗存，理学家虽然信仰自然神，但坚决反对为自然神塑像，他们与世俗陋俗针锋相对。张载说:“山川之祀，止是其如此巍然而高，渊然而深，蒸润而足以兴云致雨，必报之，故祀之视三公诸侯，何曾有此人像!圣人为政必去之”(《经学理窟·祭祀》)。

This passage disenchants the sacrifice to mountains and rivers on two levels. First, although Zhang Zai believed that producing clouds and bringing rain is a divine act, he argued that it is not mysterious; there is an explicable principle—the mountains are high and the valleys deep, so they can steam and moisten and bring rain—which humans cannot do. To repay their grace, mountains and rivers are worshipped as spirits. Second, mountains and rivers can “produce clouds and bring rain” because of their structure. Therefore, the mountains and rivers themselves are the spirits, and there should not be a separate, tangible spirit.

这段话是从两个层面上，为山川祭祀进行了祛魅。其一，尽管张载认为兴云致雨是一种神性行为，但他主张兴云致雨并不神秘，其中有山高渊深所以能蒸润致雨这种可以解释的道理，这是人做不到的，为了报答它的恩德，所以要把山川作为神灵祭祀。其二，山川能“兴云致雨”，是因为山川的结构造成的，所以山川本身才是神，而不应另外有一个有形的灵。

These two points are actually derived from Confucian classics. For example, the Book of Rites, “Jifa,” says: “Forests, mountains, valleys, and hills that can produce clouds, create wind and rain, and manifest strange things are all called spirits.” Zhang Zai inherited this idea, but his creativity also lies in his ability to explain why mountains and rivers are “spirits” from the perspective of their structure, reflecting that Zhang Zai had reached a certain height in epistemology.

这两点其实是从儒家经典引申而来的，如《礼记·祭法》说:“山林、山谷、丘陵能出云，为风雨、见怪物，皆曰神”。张载继承的就是这个思想，但张载的创造性还在于，他能从山川结构上去解释山川之为“神”的原因，反映了张载已达到了认识论的一个高度。

Zhu Xi also held similar views opposing human-shaped idols. He criticized: “Nowadays, when people sacrifice to the spirits of heaven, earth, mountains, and rivers, they make statues and images to offer sacrifices—this is utterly devoid of principle.” He also said, “Confucius himself should not have had an image set up. During the spring and autumn sacrifices, it would be sufficient to set up a spirit tablet and sacrifice” (Zhuzi yulei, “Li qi”). Chen Chun also criticized that people of his time painted stars as human figures, which is “completely ignorant of the condition of ghosts and spirits.” He further criticized: “Mount Tai is just a mountain; how can it have a human form and appearance?” (Beixi ziyi, “Guishen”). Moreover, they would put a crown and royal robes on it, seat it, and even establish a consort for it—unimaginable. Zhang Shi said: “Mountains stand and rivers flow—these are their forms. Why make them into humans? Their qi circulates and can connect with each other. Why build houses for them?” (Nanxuan ji, vol. 10, “Yaoshan Lijiang er tan ji”).

类似反对人形偶像的说法朱熹也有，他曾批判说:“如今祀天地山川神，塑貌像以祭，极无义理。”又说，“宣圣本不当设像，春秋祭时，只设主祭可也”(《朱子语类·礼七》)。陈淳也批判说，时人画星辰都画个人，这是“鬼神情状都不晓”，又批评说:“泰山只是个山，安有人形貌?”(《北溪字义·鬼神》)而且还要为之垂旒端冕，衣裳而坐，甚至立后配对，不可思议。张栻说:“夫山峙而川流是其形也，而人之也，何居?其气之流通可以相接也，而宇之也，何居?”(《南轩集》卷十《尧山滩江二坛记》)

The Neo-Confucians’ critique of monstrous things and evil spirits and their opposition to idol worship were closely related to the scientific atmosphere of the time. From the Song to the Yuan, the state consciously promoted the development of science and technology, producing peaks such as Shen Kuo in the Northern Song and Guo Shoujing at the end of the Song and beginning of the Yuan. The Neo-Confucians, as intellectual elites, actively participated in this as well. For example, Shao Yong studied “the study of physical things” [1]1 The *Hetu* (Yellow River Chart) and *Luoshu* (Luo River Writing) are mythical diagrams said to have been revealed by a dragon-horse and a spirit-turtle, respectively, to the sage-kings Fuxi and Yu; they are foundational to the cosmology of the *Yijing* (Book of Changes). from Li Zhicai (History of the Song, Biography of Li Zhicai); the Cheng brothers [2]2 Kong Anguo (c. 156–c. 74 BCE) was a Confucian scholar of the Western Han dynasty; the “nine categories” (jiu chou) refer to the nine divisions of the *Great Plan* (Hongfan) chapter of the *Shangshu* (Book of Documents). engaged in discussions on the calendar (The Surviving Works of the Two Chengs, juan 15); Zhang Zai’s Correcting Ignorance, “The Chapter on the Two and the Three” [3]3 Zhou Dunyi (1017–1073) was a Northern Song philosopher whose Diagram of the Supreme Ultimate became a foundational text for Neo-Confucian cosmology. is a scientific reflection on the operation of the cosmos; Zhu Xi conducted item-by-item investigations into the generation of the cosmos, the luminescence of the sun, moon, and stars, the formation of frost, snow, rain, and rainbows, and even “what wood is burned produces what kind of qi, each being different” (Classified Conversations of Master Zhu, juan 4). It was precisely the influence of the scientific atmosphere that propelled the elevation of the rational spirit among the Neo-Confucians.

理学家批判物怪神奸、反对偶像崇拜，其实与当时的科学氛围密切相关。从宋到元，国家有意识地推动科学技术的发展,由此产生了北宋有沈括、宋末元初有郭守敬的高峰。理学家作为知识精英，也积极参与其中。如邵雍曾向李之才学习“物理之学”(《宋史·李之才传》);二程有关于历法的讨论(《二程遗书》卷一五);张载的《正蒙·参两篇》是对宇宙之运行的科学思考;朱熹对于宇宙生成、日月星的发光、霜雪雨虹的形成，甚至“烧甚么木则是甚么气，亦各不同”(《朱子语类》卷四)等进行了一物一物的探究。正是科学氛围的影响，推动了理学家们理性精神的高扬。

2. Theoretical Transformation of Ghosts and Spirits

2.对鬼神的理论改造

Criticizing monstrous things and evil spirits and opposing idol worship only served to clear away irrational and crude superstition. The more important task for the Neo-Confucians was to clearly explain what kind of existence the ghosts and spirits they themselves believed in actually were. The supreme being among ghosts and spirits is the “Heaven” or “Lord on High” [4]4 The Five Phases (wuxing) are Metal, Wood, Water, Fire, and Earth, a traditional Chinese cosmological scheme for categorizing natural phenomena and their interactions. of Confucian belief, an important deity recorded in the classics and invoked in state affairs. Therefore, the Neo-Confucians had to devote more effort to the theoretical interpretation of “Heaven” or “Lord on High,” in order to refine their beliefs.

批判物怪神奸、反对偶像崇拜只是对非理性的、粗陋的迷信进行廓清，理学家更重要的任务是讲清楚他们自己信仰的鬼神究竟是怎样的存在。鬼神中的至上者是儒家信仰的“天”或“帝”，这是载之经典，诉诸国政的重要神灵。因此，理学家要将更多的工夫用在对“天”或“帝”的理论阐释上，以期将他们的信仰精致化。

Zhang Zai first affirmed the divinity of Heaven, saying: “Earth is a thing; Heaven is a spirit. There is no principle by which a thing surpasses a spirit” (Correcting Ignorance, “The Chapter on the Two and the Three”). However, this revered spirit was not mysterious. Zhang Zai provided a three-tiered interpretation of “Heaven.” In terms of physical form, Heaven is a mass of vacuous qi: “From the Great Void comes the name of Heaven” (Correcting Ignorance, “The Chapter on Great Harmony”). In terms of nature and principle, Heaven is the ultimate principle: “‘The sun and moon attain Heaven’ means they attain the natural principle, not the blue-green physical form” (Correcting Ignorance, “The Chapter on the Two and the Three”). In terms of ethics, Heaven is the source of the myriad things: “Heaven’s generation of things has order; things’ having form has regularity” (Correcting Ignorance, “The Chapter on Animals and Plants”). The understanding of ghosts and spirits represented by Heaven among subsequent Neo-Confucians was basically established within this scope.

张载首先肯定天的神性，他说:“地，物也;天，神也。物无踰神之理”(《正蒙·参两篇》)。然而这尊神并不神秘，张载对“天”进行了三层诠释。从形体上说，天是一团虚气，“由太虚，有天之名”(《正蒙·太和篇》)。从性理上讲，天就是至理，“‘日月得天’，得自然之理也，非苍苍之形”(《正蒙·参两篇》)。从伦理上讲，天是万物之源，“天之生物也有序，物之既形也有秩”(《正蒙·动物篇》)。之后的理学家对以天为代表的鬼神的认识，基本上就在此确立的范围之内了。

The Cheng brothers directly used principle and qi to explain their students’ questions about Heaven and ghosts and spirits. They said: “Heaven is principle. Spirit is what is spoken of as the wonder of the myriad things. Lord on High is named for the matter of presiding over things” (The Surviving Works of the Two Chengs, juan 11). Someone also asked with a skeptical attitude: “Since there are sacrifices, is it not necessary that there are spirits?” The reply was: “Qi is precisely spirit. People today do not understand this principle. As soon as there is a flood or drought, they go to the temple to pray, not knowing what rain and dew are, where they come from, and yet they go to the temple to seek them” (The Surviving Works of the Two Chengs, juan 22, part 1). Similarly, Zhang Shi said: “Ghosts and spirits, though hidden, are not outside principle” (Analects Explained, “Eight Rows of Dancers”). Chen Chun said: “Speaking of the greatness of the Way, its source comes from Heaven” (Meanings of Terms from the Northern Stream, juan xia). Besides using principle and qi to explain ghosts and spirits, the Cheng brothers and Zhu Xi also strove to transform ghosts and spirits into something perceptible and visible, explaining them through natural changes such as the passing of spring and winter and the melting of ice and snow: “Ghosts and spirits refer to the traces of creation and transformation; in the flourishing and decline of the myriad things, their waxing and waning can be seen” (Cheng’s Commentary on the Book of Changes, juan 4). All these efforts cleared away as much as possible people’s mystical understanding of ghosts and spirits, entering the context of philosophical expression.

二程直接用理与气来解释学生对天与鬼神的疑问，他说:“天者，理也。神者，妙万物而为言者也。帝者，以主宰事而名”(《二程遗书》卷十一)。又有人以怀疑的态度问:“既有祭，则莫须有神否?”答:“只气便是神也。今人不知此理，才有水旱便去庙中祈祷，不知雨露是甚物，从何处出，复于庙中求耶”(《二程遗书》卷二十二上)。又如张栻说:“鬼神虽幽，不外乎理”(《论语解·八佾》)。陈淳说:“论道之大，源出于天”(《北溪字义》卷下)。除了用理气阐释鬼神外，二程与朱熹还极力将鬼神改造得可感可见，以春去冬来、冰雪消融等自然变化解释鬼神，“鬼神，谓造化之迹，于万物盛衰可见其消息也”(《程氏易传》卷四)。以上这些努力，都尽可能地廓清了人们对鬼神的神秘主义认识，进入哲学表达的语境。

The Neo-Confucian transformation of ghosts and spirits was intended to solve concrete problems. First, performing sacrifices according to ethical rules was the basic work of Confucianism, and the Neo-Confucianized ghosts and spirits provided the theoretical basis for this. The Son of Heaven sacrificing to Heaven and to famous mountains and great rivers, and the feudal lords sacrificing to the mountains and rivers within their domains, were the basic principles of traditional Confucian official sacrifice. Beginning with Confucius, Confucianism strongly opposed transgressive sacrifices. The Analects, “Eight Rows of Dancers,” records Confucius crying out: “Could it be that Mount Tai is less discerning than Lin Fang?” [5]5 Zhang Shi (1133–1180) was a Southern Song Neo-Confucian philosopher, a contemporary of Zhu Xi, associated with the “School of the Way.” According to ritual propriety, the Ji family’s sacrifice to Mount Tai was a transgressive sacrifice. But while there was a classical basis, a higher-level philosophical rationale was lacking. The philosophy of principle and qi filled this gap from the perspective of natural law.

对鬼神的理学化改造，是为了解决具体问题。首先，按照伦理规则祭祀是儒家的基本工作，理学化的鬼神为此提供了理论依据。天子祭天及名山大川、诸侯祭境内山川等是传统儒家官方祭祀的基本原则。自孔子始，儒家就极力反对僭越的祭祀。《论语·八佾》记载，孔子疾呼:“曾谓泰山不如林放乎?”根据礼制，季氏祭泰山属于僭越的祭祀。但经典依据归经典依据，更高层次的哲学道理是缺位的，理气哲学就从自然法的角度补上了这一不足。

Hu Shuqi asked: “The Son of Heaven sacrifices to Heaven and Earth, the feudal lords sacrifice to mountains and rivers, the high officials sacrifice to the five household spirits, and the scholar-officials and common people sacrifice to their ancestors. Is this because their station requires it?” Zhu Xi replied: “It is also because their qi is connected to them. For example, the Son of Heaven is the master of Heaven and Earth, so he can sacrifice to that Heaven and Earth. If it were someone else, not originally connected to them, what would they be sacrificing to?” (Classified Conversations of Master Zhu, “Rites, Part Seven”). The same applied to family sacrifices. People should not sacrifice to the ancestors of others, because “apart from one’s own ancestors, there is no connection, and no principle for sacrifice.” “Excessive sacrifices bring no blessing, because the connecting threads are not related” (Meanings of Terms from the Northern Stream, “Ghosts and Spirits”). Zhang Shi said: “If there is no such principle and one forces it, even if one makes a hundred bows in prayer and prepares abundant offerings, any response that occasionally occurs is merely coincidental” (Collected Works of the Southern Studio, juan 10, “Record of the Altars at Yaoshan Tanjiang”). Thus, the philosophy of principle and qi provided a rational and principled justification for the ethical norms of sacrifice.

胡叔器问:“天子祭天地，诸侯祭山川，大夫祭五祀，士庶人祭其先，此是分当如此否?”朱熹答:“也是气与他相关。如天子则是天地之主，便祭得那天地。若似其他人，与他本不相关后，祭个什么?”(《朱子语类·礼七》)家族祭祀亦然，人不当祭祀别人的祖先，因为“自祖先之外，皆不相干涉，无可祭之理。”“淫祀无福，由脉络不相关之故”(《北溪字义·鬼神》)。张栻说:“无其理而强为之，虽百拜而祈，备物以飨，其有时而应也，亦偶然而已耳”(《南轩集》卷十《尧山滩江二坛记》)。所以，理气哲学为祭祀的伦理规范做了合理性与道理化的辩护。

Second, the essence of sacrifice is the interaction between humans and ghosts and spirits. The Neo-Confucianized ghosts and spirits provided the theoretical basis for this human-spirit interaction. The principle of human-spirit interaction is the condensation of spirit to move and respond to ghosts and spirits. Chen Chun said: “In ancient times, when people performed sacrifices, they necessarily had this actual principle connecting them. Then they fasted for three days and purified themselves for seven days to concentrate their spirit. Once their spirit was concentrated, the spirit of the one being sacrificed to was also concentrated, and there was necessarily the principle of its arrival.” If one continued to ask why concentrating the spirit could move and respond to ghosts and spirits, this involved qi. “Humans and the myriad things of Heaven and Earth all share one common qi between them. Descendants and ancestors also share one common qi, with connecting threads and relationships” (Meanings of Terms from the Northern Stream, “Ghosts and Spirits”). Therefore, the interaction between humans and ghosts and spirits in sacrifice was achieved because the qi channels were connected. If they were not connected, the sacrifice would be ineffective.

其次，祭祀的本质是人与鬼神的交接，理学化的鬼神为人神交接提供了理论依据。人神交接的原理，就是精神凝聚以感格鬼神。陈淳说:“古人祭祀，须是有此实理相关，然后三日斋，七日戒，以聚吾之精神。吾之精神既聚，则所祭者精神亦聚，必自有来格底道理。”若要再继续追问，何以凝神便能感格鬼神，这就涉及了气。“人与天地万物，皆是两间公共一个气。子孙与祖宗，又是公共一气中有个脉络相关系”(《北溪字义·鬼神》)。所以祭祀中的鬼神得以交接，是因为气脉相通了，若不相通，那么祭祀将是无效的。

Concentrating the spirit and gathering qi is actually a concrete extension of the concept of “sincerity” [6]6 “Sacrifice as if present” (ji ru zai) is a phrase from the Analects (3.12), where Confucius says “Sacrifice as if present; sacrifice to the spirits as if the spirits are present.” in the classics. The Doctrine of the Mean says: “Sincerity is the beginning and end of things; without sincerity there is nothing.” “The way of utmost sincerity can foreknow... When calamity or blessing is about to come: good, it will certainly foreknow it; not good, it will certainly foreknow it. Therefore, utmost sincerity is like a spirit.” The Great Learning says: “To rectify one’s mind, one must first make one’s intentions sincere.” Mencius, “Li Lou I,” says: “Sincerity is the Way of Heaven; to think of sincerity is the Way of man. There has never been one who, being utterly sincere, did not move others.” The first chapter of Zhou Dunyi’s Penetrating the Book of Changes is “Sincerity,” emphasizing that “Sincerity is the foundation of the sage” and “‘Great indeed is the Qian Origin! The myriad things depend on it for their beginning.’ This is the source of sincerity.” “Sincerity” is an attitude; because it issues from within, is true and without falsehood, pure and fundamental, it was singled out by the Neo-Confucians and religiously transformed into the principle of connection and mutual response between humans and spirits.

凝神聚气其实是对经典中“诚”的具体延伸。《中庸》说:“诚者，物之终始，不诚无物。”“至诚之道，可以前知……祸福将至:善，必先知之;不善，必先知之。故至诚如神。”《大学》说:“欲正其心者，先诚其意”。《孟子·离娄上》说:“诚者，天之道也;思诚者，人之道也。至诚而不动者，未之有也。”周敦颐《通书》第一章就是《诚》，强调“诚者，圣人之本”“‘大哉乾元!万物资始。’诚之源也。”“诚”是一种态度，因其由内而发，真实无伪、纯粹根本，于是被理学家单独提炼，宗教化为人神接通、互相感应的原理。

Finally, the Neo-Confucians had their limitations after all, and the Neo-Confucianized ghosts and spirits also provided a theoretical basis for the supernatural phenomena they believed in. Cheng Yi once experienced a supernatural phenomenon. It is said that when Shao Yong was on his deathbed, people came to visit him. They whispered among themselves about changing the burial site Shao Yong had designated himself, but Shao Yong always knew the content of their discussions and repeatedly sent people to correct them. Even when they moved far away from Shao Yong’s sickroom, Shao Yong still knew what they were discussing. Regarding why Shao Yong could have foreknowledge, Cheng Yi explained: “For others to see it, they would consider it strange. This is only because his mind was empty and clear, so he could hear.” “Mind empty and clear” is very mysterious, so his student further asked why Shao Yong was not like this before he fell ill. Cheng Yi replied: “This is only because after illness, his qi was about to expire, his mind had no thoughts or concerns, and was not clouded, so it was like this.” That is to say, when a person’s qi is reduced, they lack the strength to think about too many things, and their mind becomes empty and clear instead. Someone else asked how to explain that some Buddhists also had foreknowledge. The reply was: “It is merely a matter of not being moved in mind... If a person can understand the origin, know the principle of life, then they can understand the end, know the principle of death. If one does not understand clearly, then even if one makes thousands of arrangements, it will be of no use” (The Surviving Works of the Two Chengs, juan 18).

最后，理学家毕竟有局限性，理学化的鬼神也为他们相信的超自然现象提供了理论依据。程颐曾经历过一次超自然现象，讲得是邵雍奄奄一息时，众人前去探望，他们切切私语讨论着要改变邵雍自己指定的墓葬处，然邵雍却总是能知道他们讨论的内容，故屡屡遣人来纠正，即使他们躲开邵雍卧房很远，邵雍也知道他们在讨论什么。关于邵雍为什么能前知，程颐解释说:“以他人观之，便以为怪，此只是心虚而明，故听得。”“心虚而明”很玄，故他的学生又追问说，邵雍未病时并不如此。程颐答:“此只是病后气将绝，心无念虑，不昏，便如此。”就是说，人的气少了，无力思考过多的东西，心中反而空灵澄明了。又有人问，佛徒中也有人先知，怎么解释?曰:“只是一个不动心……人能原始，知得生理，便能要终，知得死理。若不明得，便虽千万般安排着，亦不济事”(《二程遗书》卷十八)。

Due to historical limitations, some natural phenomena were also erroneously transmitted as supernatural phenomena. The Neo-Confucians believed them, and so also used principle and qi to explain them. For example, regarding inhabitants on islands, Cheng Yi said: “There are those born from qi transformation and then reproduced by seeds... After the qi has transformed, if it does not transform further, then reproduction proceeds by seeds. This principle is very clear.” There were also popular sayings that “the inanimate transforms into the animate, such as the maple tree transforming into an old man. The animate transforms into the inanimate, such as the ‘looking-for-husband rock’ transforming into stone.” [7]7 Chen Chun (1159–1223) was a disciple of Zhu Xi and a key transmitter of his thought. Zhu Xi believed this, and so explained: “There is no such principle... In Sichuan, there are cicadas transforming into flowers, and earthworms transforming into lilies. This principle certainly exists” (The Surviving Works of the Two Chengs, juan 18).

由于历史的局限性，还有些自然现象被以讹传讹成了超自然现象，理学家们信了，于是也用理气进行解释。如海岛上的住民，程颐说:“有气化生之后而种生者……气既化，后更不化，便以种生去。此理甚明。”社会上又有传言说“无情而化为有情者，若枫树化为老人是也。有情而化为无情者，如望夫化为石是也。”朱熹信了，于是解释说:“莫无此理。……川中有蝉化为花，蚯蚓化为百合，固有此理”(《二程遗书》卷十八)。

Someone asked about dream divination. Zhu Xi replied: “The human spirit communicates with the yin and yang of Heaven and Earth. Therefore, what one does by day and dreams by night, their good and evil, fortune and misfortune, each arrives according to its category. Thus the former kings established offices and appointed subordinates, causing them to observe the convergence of Heaven and Earth, to distinguish the qi of yin and yang, and to use the sun, moon, and stars to divine the good and ill fortune of the six types of dreams, presenting auspicious dreams and sending away inauspicious dreams. In the interaction between Heaven and man, their investigation was detailed and their reverence extreme” (Collected Commentaries on the Book of Songs, juan 11, “Lesser Odes, Part Two”).

有人问梦占。朱熹答:“人之精神与天地阴阳流通，故昼之所为，夜之所梦，其善恶吉凶各以崩至，是以先王建官设属，使之观天地之会，辨阴阳之气，以日月星辰占六梦之吉凶，献吉梦、赠恶梦，其于天人相舆之际，察之详而敬之至矣”(《诗集传》卷十一《小雅二》)。

Cheng Yi’s [explanation of] Shao Yong’s foreknowledge, the island dwellers, the maple tree turning into an old man, and Zhu Xi’s summary of dream divination as “principle” (li) are all merely empty “principle”—capable of explaining everything, they explain nothing clearly. But this is not important; in fact, whether or not this “principle” exists is what is truly important. Because the positing of “principle” disenchants those supernatural phenomena to the greatest extent, preventing people from falling into mysticism, which is of great benefit to promoting the progress of social thought.

程颐为邵雍的前知、海岛居民、枫化老人以及朱熹为梦占总结的“理”，其实都只是空“理”，什么都能解释，也就什么都解释不清了。但这并不重要，其实有没有这个“理”才很重要。因为“理”的提出，在最大程度上为那些超自然现象进行了祛魅，让人不再陷入神秘主义，对于推动社会思想的进步大有裨益。

III. The Atheistic Implications of Song Dynasty Neo-Confucianism

三、宋代理学的无神论意蕴

Song Neo-Confucianism was not thoroughgoing atheism. Like all ancient schools of thought, Neo-Confucianism was merely an intermediate link in the development of atheism. Yet Song Neo-Confucianism still possessed important atheistic implications, reflected in two aspects: on the one hand, the Neo-Confucianized view of ghosts and spirits dismantled mysticism; on the other hand, the internal incoherence of Neo-Confucianism served as a counter-evidence for the illusoriness of ghosts and spirits.

宋代理学不是彻底的无神论，和所有古代学派一样，理学只是无神论发展的一个中间环节。但宋代理学仍有无神论的重要意蕴，这反映在两个方面:一方面，理学化的鬼神观瓦解了神秘主义;另一方面，理学内部的不自洽性反证了鬼神的虚妄。

1. The Dismantling of Mysticism by Neo-Confucianized Ghosts and Spirits

1.理学化的鬼神对神秘主义的瓦解

In Confucianism, Heaven was originally the Lord on High (Shangdi), the supreme deity. Therefore, Heaven’s generation of things necessarily carried an element of mystery. Zhu Xi said: “That which can generate things is spirit” (Classified Conversations of Master Zhu, “Rites, Part Seven”). This accords with the statements of the Confucian classics. But to speak only of “generating and generating” (sheng sheng) does not reach the end of explanation. And further explanation could potentially dissolve the mystery of Heaven-and-Earth’s generation of things, and thereby dissolve the mystery of the Lord on High and of ghosts and spirits.

儒学中的天本来是上帝，是至上神，因此上天生物就必然带有神秘性。朱熹说:“能生物，便是神也”(《朱子语类·礼七》)。这符合儒家经典的说法。但只讲到“生生”，却没有达到解释的尽头。而进一步的解释，就有可能消解天地生物的神秘性，进而消解上帝、鬼神的神秘性了。

Zhou Dunyi composed the Diagram of the Supreme Ultimate (Taiji tu), synthesizing the intellectual achievements of his time to provide a philosophical explanation of “Heaven-and-Earth’s generation of things.” As shown in the diagram, which is the version revised by Zhu Xi, the first circle represents the undifferentiated Non-Ultimate (wuji). Driven by the two forces of “yang in motion” and “yin at rest,” the cosmos enters the state of the Supreme Ultimate (taiji). The Supreme Ultimate then generates the Five Phases (wuxing), and the generation of the Five Phases also has an order: Metal generates Water, Water generates Wood, Wood generates Fire, Fire generates Earth, and Earth generates Metal. Earth connects to the small circle at the bottom, meaning “each thing has a Supreme Ultimate,” and finally the myriad things are generated.

周敦颐作《太极图》，就是综合了当时的知识成果，对“天地生物”进行的哲学解释。如图，是朱熹改动的太极图,第一个圆表示混沦无极，在“阳动”“阴静”两股力量的推动下，宇宙进入太极状态。太极又生五行，而五行之“生”也有顺序，即金生水，水生木，木生火，火生土，土生金。土与最底下的小圆连接，意为“物物有一太极”，最后万物生成。

The generation of things by Heaven and Earth was originally merely an outline, appearing mysterious because it lacked concrete details. Once the Diagram of the Supreme Ultimate provided a philosophical description of Heaven-and-Earth’s generation of things, everything appeared natural and spontaneous. A Heaven or Lord on High with will was directly eliminated.

天地生物本来只是一个纲领，因为没有具体细节而显得神秘。当《太极图》对天地生物进行了哲学描述后，一切都显得自然而然，有意志的天或上帝被直接取消了。

Thus it can be said that Neo-Confucianized ghosts and spirits were originally meant to serve belief, but in fact played a counterproductive role. In the face of “Heavenly principle” (tianli), nothing mysterious remains mysterious. For example, when someone asked about the Way of Heaven (tiandao), Cheng Yi replied: “It is simply principle; principle is precisely the Way of Heaven. For instance, when it is said that ‘August Heaven shakes with anger,’ ultimately there is no person up above who is shaking with anger; it is simply that principle is thus” (Surviving Works of the Two Chengs, juan 22, part 1). Zhang Zai, discussing “strange things” (wuguai), said: “What the many see is my principle, is spirit; what one sees with a biased view is either illness or falsehood” (Recorded Sayings of Master Zhang, juan 1). August Heaven is spirit, but its essence is principle; even the sun, moon, falling stars, and other things seen by the many are principle—this is the essence of spirit. Faced with the same object, when I call it spirit, it falls into mysticism, but if I rename it “principle,” its mystery immediately disappears.

所以说，理学化的鬼神本来是为信仰服务的，但其实起到了反作用。在“天理”面前，一切神秘都不再神秘。如有人问天道，程颐答:“只是理，理便是天道也。且如说皇天震怒，终不是有人在上震怒，只是理如此”(《二程遗书》卷二十二上)。张载论“物怪”时说:“众见之即我理也，神也，偏见之者非病即伪”(《张子语录》卷上)。皇天是神，但本质是理;甚至日月、陨石等众见之物都是理，这才是神的本质。面对同一对象，当我指其为神时，它就陷入了神秘主义，但换称为“理”，其神秘性便立刻消失了。

Neo-Confucianized ghosts and spirits could also serve as a tool to actively dismantle certain superstitions. Zhang Shi once lodged at a temple, “at night heard the sound of small chickens numbering in the tens of thousands, rose to look, and saw the air filled with lamplight covering the ground.” The temple monk told him that this had been an ancient battlefield, and on overcast days this strange phenomenon would appear. Zhang Shi did not accept the connection between the ancient battlefield and the strange phenomenon. He believed that “if qi does not disperse, then because yin and yang press against and thin each other, it produces sound. Qi itself produces sound; what does it have to do with humans!” (Collected Works of Master Nanxuan, Supplement, “Discussions”). Zhang Shi used the theory of the gathering and dispersal of qi to dispel superstitious explanations of natural anomalies. We could even say that this was a crude scientific explanation.

理学化的鬼神还可以作为工具，主动瓦解一些迷信。张栻曾宿一寺，“夜闻小鸡声以数万计，起视之，见弥空灯明满地。”寺僧告诉他，这里曾是古战场，遇阴晦天就会由此异象。张栻并不认可古战场与异象的关系，他认为，“气不散则因阴阳蒸薄而有声，气自为声，于人何预!”(《南轩先生集补遗·论说》)张栻用气的聚散说破除了人们对自然异象的迷信解释，我们甚至可以说，这是一种粗浅的科学解释。

The Diagram of the Supreme Ultimate as Revised by Zhu Xi

朱熹改定的《太极图》

(Cited from Cases on Song and Yuan Scholars, vol. 1, Zhonghua Book Company, 1986, p. 497.)

（引自《宋元学案》第一册，中华书局，1986年，第497页。）

The Neo-Confucians advocated sacrifice and divination. Although their essence was communication between humans and spirits, the Neo-Confucians were unwilling to stop at a crude surface level, so they summarized it as “sincerity” (cheng). But because they overemphasized the subjective effort of “sincerity,” the objective ghosts and spirits that the Neo-Confucians originally believed in were instead controlled by their subjective thoughts.

理学家是主张祭祀与占卜的，虽然其本质是人神沟通，但理学家不愿意停留在粗疏的表象上，他们于是总结出了“诚”。但由于过分强调“诚”的主观努力，于是理学家们本来以为的客观之鬼神，反而被他们的主观意念控制起来了。

Zhu Xi said: “At the suburban sacrifice, the Heavenly spirits arrive; at the ancestral temple, the human ghosts enjoy the offerings—both are brought about by oneself.” “Sincerity is the substance; ritual is the form” (Collected Commentaries on the Four Books, “Collected Commentaries on the Analects,” “Bayi Chapter”). He also said: “If the presiding sacrificer must be extremely sincere in intention, then he can move and attract [the spirits]”; “If [the spirits] are too distant, unless one is extremely sincere, one cannot attract them” (Classified Conversations of Master Zhu, “Analects, Part Seven,” “Bayi Chapter”). He also said: “Praying for rain and the like is also using sincerity to move their qi. Praying to spirits and Buddhas and the like is also that the qi of the mountains and rivers where they dwell can be moved” (Classified Conversations of Master Zhu, “Rites, Part Seven”). Although Zhu Xi opposed the norm of “sacrifice as if present” and opposed the popular saying “if there is sincerity, then there is spirit; if there is no sincerity, then there is no spirit,” yet under the deep development of the philosophy of “sincerity,” the existence or non-existence of ghosts and spirits still became something controllable by human subjective will.

朱熹说“郊则天神格，庙则人鬼享，皆由己以致之也。”“诚为实，礼为虚”(《四书章句集注·论语集注·八佾篇》)。又说“若主祭者须是极其诚意，方可感格“若太远者，自非极其至诚不足以格之”(《朱子语类·论语七·八佾篇》)。又说“祈雨之类，亦是以诚感其气。如祈神佛之类，亦是其所居山川之气可感”(《朱子语类·礼七》》。虽然朱熹反对“祭如在”的规范，并且反对“有其诚则有其神，无其诚则无其神”的流行说法。但在“诚”哲学的深入发挥下，鬼神的有无还是成为人主观意志可以控制的事情。

Because the interaction between humans and ghosts and spirits increasingly depended on “sincerity,” pushing forward further, “sincerity” became the very substance of ghosts and spirits. Contrary to Zhu Xi’s opposition, Chen Chun considered the saying “with sincerity there is spirit, without sincerity there is no spirit” to be “extremely well said.” He also said: “One must have this actual principle, then extend one’s sincere reverence, and supplement it with a sincere heart—how could [the spirits] not enjoy the offerings?” (Meanings of Words from the Northern Stream, “Ghosts and Spirits”). Zhu Xi, starting from practice, worried that ghosts and spirits would be controlled by human subjectivity. But Chen Chun, from the perspective of substance, affirmed “with sincerity there is spirit, without sincerity there is no spirit.” On the surface, this bound ghosts and spirits to sincerity; in reality, it transformed sincerity into a substance, making it directly the substance of ghosts and spirits.

由于人与鬼神的交接越来越决定于“诚”,再向前推进，“诚”就成了鬼神之本体了。与朱熹的反对不同，陈淳认为“有诚有神，无诚无神”这话“说得最好”,又说“须是有此实理，然后致其诚敬，而副以实心，岂不歆享”(《北溪字义·鬼神》)。朱熹从实践出发，担忧鬼神受到人的主观控制。但陈淳从本体的角度认可“有诚有神，无诚无神”，表面是把鬼神与诚进行了绑定，实际是把诚进行了本体化改造，直接成为鬼神的本体。

Chen Chun’s approach already had traces in earlier Confucians. For example, Cheng Yi said: “The utmost filial piety and brotherly respect penetrate to the spiritual beings. Spiritual beings and filial piety and brotherly respect are not two different things; filial piety and brotherly respect are precisely the principle of spiritual beings.” Someone then asked about the miracle of Wang Xiang lying on the ice to get carp. [Cheng Yi] replied: “This moving and attracting came from Wang Xiang’s sincerity; it is not that Wang Xiang was filial here and the thing came from there” (Surviving Works of the Two Chengs, juan 18). Cheng Yi’s meaning was that filial piety and brotherly respect are subjective attitudes; rather than serving as a medium between humans and spirits, it is better to directly understand them as being one with ghosts and spirits. Zhang Zai said: “The Way by which Heaven endures long and unceasingly is what is called sincerity”; “The unity of nature and the Way lies in sincerity” (Correcting Youthful Ignorance, “Sincerity and Enlightenment”). The difference between “sincerity” and principle-qi is that principle and qi are objective existences, while sincerity is a subjective attitude. Cheng [Yi] and Zhang [Zai] both caused what was originally objective existence to become one with subjective sincerity, which meant that subjective willpower was infinitely magnified. In fact, Zhu Xi also unconsciously fell into a logic that takes the subject as the foundation. He said: “Heaven is only within me; what more is there to pray for? Within this one body, all thoughts, reflections, and movements are nothing other than Heaven” (Classified Conversations of Master Zhu, “Rites, Part Seven”). In fact, the Neo-Confucians also placed great importance on the statement in the Doctrine of the Mean that “without sincerity, there is nothing.” Zhang Zai also had a discussion on “enlarging the mind” (daxin), which all provided important inspiration for the School of the Mind (xinxue). As far as atheism is concerned, after becoming one with “sincerity,” ghosts and spirits suddenly became subjective creations, and their objective reality was naturally dissolved.

陈淳的做法在先儒那里已经有了蛛丝马迹，如程颐说:“孝弟之至，通于神明。神明孝弟，不是两般事，只孝弟便是神明之理。”于是有人问王祥卧冰求鲤奇迹的原因。曰:“此感格便是王祥诚中来，非王祥孝于此而物来于彼也”(《二程遗书》卷十八)。程颐的意思是，孝悌是主观态度，与其作为人神的中介，不如将之直接理解为与鬼神合一更好。张载说:“天所以长久不已之道，乃所谓诚”，“性与天道合一存乎诚”(《正蒙·诚明》)。“诚”与理气的区别是，理气为客观存在，而诚是主观态度。程、张都是让本来客观的存在与主观的诚合一了，这意味着主观意志力被无限放大。事实上，朱熹也不自觉的陷入以主体为根本的逻辑，他说:“天只在我，更祷个什么?一身之中，凡所思虑运动，无非是天”(《朱子语类·礼七》)。事实上，理学家们也特别看重《中庸》里面“不诚无物”的说法，张载也有“大心”之论，这都对心学产生了重要的启发。就无神论而言，在与“诚”合体之后，鬼神一下子成了主观的创造物，其客观实在性也就自然消解。

2. The Internal Contradictions That Cannot Be Self-Consistent Reinforce the Illusoriness of Ghosts and Spirits

2.不能自洽的内在矛盾强化了鬼神的虚妄

Because of the limitations of their historical era, the Neo-Confucians carried many intellectual burdens, leading to an incomplete disenchantment of ghosts and spirits. This created theoretical self-inconsistency, thereby planting the seed of “the illusoriness of ghosts and spirits,” unconsciously promoting the development of atheistic thought.

理学家们因为历史的局限性，带着诸多思想包袱，导致对鬼神祛魅化的不彻底，从而造成了理论上的不能自洽，因此种下了“鬼神虚妄”的种子，不自觉地推动了无神论思想的发展。

The first is the conflict between philosophical rationality and traditional belief. Zhang Zai not only understood the principle that “adapting to the occasion is ritual,” but even unconsciously hollowed out the religious nature of sacrificial rites. He once held that sacrifice was actually just going through the motions, as in: “Floods and droughts are caused by their qi; what use is there in praying? The people suffer thus; the sage cannot sit idly by, but is merely concerned for the people” (Classical Studies in the Cave of Principles, “Sacrifice”). This passage had already reached the extreme point of a utilitarian and realistic understanding of sacrifice. Yet when faced with traditional belief, he still criticized people for “not knowing that ritual is rooted in the spontaneity of Heaven” (Classical Studies in the Cave of Principles, “Rites and Music”), strengthening the a priori nature of ritual and elevating the divinity of ritual.

首先是哲学理性与传统信仰之间的冲突。张载不仅懂得“时措之宜便是礼”的道理，甚至在不自觉中架空了祭礼的宗教性。他一度认为，祭祀其实是做个样子，如“水旱既其气使然，祈祷复何用意也?民患若此，不可坐视，圣人忧民而已”(《经学理窟·祭祀》)。这段话已经达到了对祭祀功利主义和现实主义之认识的极点。但面对传统信仰时，他仍然要批评人们“不知礼本天之自然”(《经学理窟·礼乐》)，强化礼的先天性，推高礼的神性。

Zhang Shi opposed the popular saying that “Fuxi obtained the *Hetu* and the *Luoshu* to create the eight trigrams,”[1]1 The *Hetu* (Yellow River Chart) and *Luoshu* (Luo River Writing) are mythical diagrams said to have been revealed by a dragon-horse and a spirit-turtle, respectively, to the sage-kings Fuxi and Yu; they are foundational to the cosmology of the *Yijing* (Book of Changes). also opposed Zheng Xuan’s claim that the *Hetu* comprised nine chapters and the *Luoshu* two chapters, and also opposed Kong Anguo’s view that the *Hetu* was the eight trigrams and the *Luoshu* the nine categories.[2]2 Kong Anguo (c. 156–c. 74 BCE) was a Confucian scholar of the Western Han dynasty; the “nine categories” (jiu chou) refer to the nine divisions of the *Great Plan* (Hongfan) chapter of the *Shangshu* (Book of Documents). Yet he firmly believed that “what communicates with Heaven is the Yellow River; a dragon-horse bearing the *Hetu* emerged, this being the sage’s virtue matching Heaven above, and Heaven sending down its auspicious sign. What centers on Earth is the Luo River; a spirit-turtle bearing the *Luoshu* emerged, this being the sage’s virtue reaching Earth below, and Earth presenting its favorable omen” (*Nanjian Yishuo*, juan 1). It is evident that traditional beliefs were deeply entrenched and could not coexist coherently with philosophical rationality in the minds of the Neo-Confucians.

张栻反对社会上流传的“伏羲得《河图》和《洛书》以作八卦”的说法，也反对郑玄《河图》九篇、《洛书》二篇的说法，也反对孔安国以《河图》为八卦，以《洛书》为九畴的说法。可他却坚信，“通于天者河也，有龙马负《图》而出，此圣人之德上配于天，而天降其祥也。中于地者洛也，有神龟载《书》而出，此圣人之德下及于地，而地呈其瑞也”(《南轩易说》卷一)。可见，传统的信仰根深蒂固，与哲学理性无法自洽地共存于理学家的头脑中。

Second is the conflict between philosophical rationality and the preservation of the classics. Just as Zhang Zai once regarded sacrifice as a tool for governing the people, Zhang Shi also once stripped divination of its supernatural character, treating it as a tool for governing the people. He said: “As for the people’s concern with good and ill fortune, it exceeds their concern with abundance and scarcity, many and few, light and heavy. The sage created the yarrow stalks, created the hexagrams, created the six lines to aid the people’s conduct. He caused all under Heaven to know right and wrong, benefit and harm, gain and loss, good and bad. Why should we again scheme and act to worry about its causes?” (*Nanjian Yishuo*, juan 1). His meaning is that, compared with material distribution, the common people care more about mysterious things like good and ill fortune, so divination is merely an educational tool crafted by the sage in response to human nature.

其次是哲学理性与维护经典之间的冲突。与张载一度以祭祀为治民之工具一样，张栻也一度去除了占卜的超自然性，以之为治民的工具。他说:“夫民之于吉凶，其甚于多寡轻重也。圣人为之蓍、为之卦、为之六爻以济民行。使天下之人咸知其是非利害、得失臧否，吾又何必营为以忧其故邪?”(《南轩易说》卷一)他的意思是，比起物质分配，老百姓对吉凶这种神秘的东西更加在乎，所以占卜只是圣针对人性而制作的教化工具而已。

Yet divination is an absolute doctrine in the Confucian classics, and the Neo-Confucians had to endorse it. In explaining the *Zhouyi* passages “The way of the sage has four aspects… those who use the stalks and shells esteem their prognostications,” “Manifesting the Way and making virtue spiritual, therefore it can respond to all and can assist the spirits,” and “The spirit knows the future, wisdom stores the past,” Zhang Zai said: “Esteeming prognostication means that in planning one must know the future.” “Showing people good and ill fortune, its Way is manifest; knowing the future and storing the past, its virtue and conduct are spiritual—this speaks of the use of the yarrow and tortoise.” “Opening things at the point before they occur, therefore it is called knowing the future; clarifying calamities and eliminating their causes, therefore it is called storing the past” (*Zhengmeng · Dayi*). In explaining the *Zhouyi* passages “Heaven produced spiritual things, the sage took them as models” and “To settle the good and ill fortune of all under Heaven and to bring about the ceaseless efforts of all under Heaven, nothing is greater than the yarrow and tortoise,” Zhang Shi said: “Heaven produced spiritual things—this refers to the yarrow and tortoise exploring the hidden and investigating the abstruse, plumbing the depths and reaching the distant.” He also said: “The yarrow, a plant, suffices to unfold the numbers of Heaven and Earth; the tortoise, an animal, suffices to manifest the images of Heaven and Earth.” “Auspicious events have omens; observing images one knows the vessel; divining events one knows the future—what is called the people’s affairs, one has surely examined them thoroughly” (*Nanjian Yishuo*, juan 1).

然而占卜是儒家经典中绝对的教条，理学家对此必须赞同。张载在解释《周易》中“圣人之道四焉……以卜筮者尚其占”，“显道神德行，是故可与酬酢，可与佑神矣”，“神以知来，知以藏往”几句，说:“尚占则谋必知来”“示人吉凶，其道显矣;知来藏往，其德行神矣，语蓍龟之用也。”“开物于几先，故曰知来;明患而弭其故，故曰藏往”(《正蒙·大易》)。张栻在解释《周易》“天生神物，圣人则之”“以定天下之吉凶，成天下之亹亹者，莫大乎蓍龟”句，说:“天生神物，谓蓍龟之探赜索隐、钩深致远者是也。”又说，“蓍，植物也，足以擛天地之数;龟，动物也，足以见天地之象。”“吉事有祥，象事知器，占事知来，所谓民之故，固已察之也熟矣”(《南轩易说》卷一)。

Furthermore, the *Shangshu · Counsels of the Great Yu* states: “For official divination, first settle the intention, then consult the great tortoise. When my intention is already fixed, and inquiries and consultations are in unanimous agreement, the ghosts and spirits will follow, the tortoise and stalks will accord, and the divination will not repeat the auspicious.” The *Shangshu · Great Plan* says: “For the tortoise, there are five; for the stalks, two are used; they develop errors.” The *Doctrine of the Mean* says: “When a state is about to flourish, there will be auspicious omens; when a state is about to perish, there will be portents and prodigies. They appear in the yarrow and tortoise, and stir in the four limbs.” The Confucian classics contain clear divinatory thought, and the Neo-Confucians could only uphold it, which created an irreconcilable contradiction with their Neo-Confucian view of ghosts and spirits.

此外，《尚书·大禹谟》有“官占，惟先蔽志，昆命于元龟。朕志先定，询谋佥同，鬼神其依，龟筮协从，卜不习吉。”《尚书·洪范》说:“卜五，占用二，衍忒。”《中庸》说:“国家将兴，必有祯祥;国家将亡，必有妖孽。见乎蓍龟，动乎四体。”儒家经典中有明确的占卜思想，理学家只能维护，这就与他们理学化的鬼神观构成了不可调和的矛盾。

Finally, there is the conflict between philosophical rationality and the residual supernatural beliefs of the Neo-Confucians themselves. Chen Chun was quite opposed to the folk superstition of *fuluan* (spirit-writing, also called *fuhe*). He said: “Those who know characters can perform it; those who do not know characters cannot. If a literate person performs it, the poems and phrases will be fresh and refined; if an illiterate person performs it, the poems and phrases will be clumsy and immature. When asking about affairs, if the person performing the *fuhe* knows the matter, then it will be written out; if they do not know the matter, it will not be written out. When it comes to chanting and composing literary works, there is nothing it cannot do; when asking about future events, it gives no response at all.” He uses logic to tell us that the efficacy of the *fuluan* superstition is greatly related to the quality of the performer himself; what responds to the questioner is not ghosts and spirits but the spirit-medium.

最后是哲学理性与理学家自己残留的超自然信仰之间的冲突。陈淳对民间扶鸾(扶鹤)迷信相当反对，他说:“识字人扶得，不识字人扶不得。能文人扶，则诗语清新;不能文人扶，则诗语拙嫩。问事而扶鹤人知事意，则写得出;不知事意则写不出。与吟咏作文章，则无不通;问未来事则全不应。”他用逻辑告诉我们，扶鸾迷信的应验，与扶鸾者本身的素质关系巨大，回应问事者的不是鬼神而是乩童。

If it stopped here, then Chen Chun’s critique of the *fuluan* superstition could be considered thorough. Yet he added: “This is not a matter of false pretense based on the person’s own knowledge; it is that ghosts and spirits, being dark and hidden, borrow the person’s spirit and vitality to manifest, following the extent of the person’s knowledge. From this one sees that the monstrous does not arise from the person” (*Beixi Ziyi · Guishen*). This addition makes his logic no longer self-consistent; the monsters he had negated return.

如果说到这里，那么陈淳对扶鸾迷信的批判应该算是彻底的。然而他却又补充道:“此非因本人之知而有假托，盖鬼神幽阴，乃藉人之精神发挥，随人知识所至耳。便见妖非由人不可”(《北溪字义·鬼神》)。这一补充，使得他的逻辑不再自洽，被他否定掉的妖怪又回来了。

Chen Chun also said: “In general, the flourishing of all kinds of ghosts and spirits arises from the human mind.” “If people consider it numinous, then it is numinous; if they do not consider it numinous, then it is not numinous. If people consider it strange, then it is strange; if they do not consider it strange, then it is not strange” (*Beixi Ziyi · Guishen*). But he also said that, aside from the orthodox spirits, when creatures such as monkeys and birds are captured and placed inside statues, “if the masses burn incense and pray morning and evening, then it will become numinous”; temples built in places with majestic mountains and rivers can also “become numinous through the *qi*”; or again, the main hall of a temple may not be numinous, but a side hall may be numinous, because “the side hall sits on the correct vein of the mountain and river.” Chen Chun said that all these “efficacies” are “simply a matter of one principle and one *qi*,” or the effect of “fasting and purifying to make one’s virtue spiritual.” Although he used principle and *qi* to explain those numinous phenomena, the numinous in that context was not created by the human mind, which contradicts his statement that “it arises from the human mind.”

陈淳又说:“凡诸般鬼神之旺，都是由人心兴之。”“人以为灵则灵，不以为灵则不灵。人以为怪则怪，不以为怪则不怪”(《北溪字义·鬼神》)。但他又说，除了正神外，猴鸟之属被抓入塑像之中，“众人朝夕焚香祷祝，便会有灵”;庙宇造于山川雄猛处，也能“气作之灵”;又或者本庙正殿不灵，但偏殿有灵，因为“偏旁坐得山川正脉处故也”。陈淳说，以上这些“灵验”，都是“一理一气故耳”，或“斋戒以神明其德”的效果。虽然用理气去解释了那些灵，但毕竟那语境中的灵不是人心所造，与他“人心兴之”的说法矛盾了。

In summary, Song Dynasty Neo-Confucianism reached the highest peak of rational speculation and the highest peak of philosophical level at that time. The Neo-Confucians attempted to use the philosophy of principle, *qi*, mind, and human nature to explain all phenomena, including prevalent mysticism. As a result, superstition suffered a heavy blow. However, the Neo-Confucians’ promotion of atheistic thought was not self-conscious; their residual supernatural beliefs and philosophical rationality constituted a contradiction that could not achieve self-consistency. On the one hand, this inversely demonstrated the illusoriness of ghosts and spirits, unconsciously advancing the development of atheism. On the other hand, the existence of contradictions is a driving force for theoretical development and also a source for further theoretical progress.

总而言之，宋代理学达到了当时理性思辨的最高峰，也达到了哲学水平的最高峰，理学家们企图用理气心性的哲学解释一切现象，包括流行的神秘主义。由此，迷信遭遇了重创。然而，理学家们对无神论思想的推动是不自觉的，他们残留的超自然信仰与哲学理性构成了无法自洽的矛盾。一方面，这反证了鬼神的虚妄，不自觉地推动了无神论的发展;另一方面，矛盾的存在是理论发展的动力，也是理论进一步发展的泉源。

(Author bios: Zhou Yun, Associate Professor, School of Marxism, Shanghai University of Applied Technology; Wang Minmin, Lecturer, Party School of the Cixi Municipal Committee of the CPC)

（作者简介：周贇，上海应用技术大学马克思主义学院副教授;王旻旻，中共慈溪市委党校讲师）

Online editor: Tongxin

网络编辑：同心