• <tr id="yyy80"></tr>
  • <sup id="yyy80"></sup>
  • <tfoot id="yyy80"><noscript id="yyy80"></noscript></tfoot>
  • 99热精品在线国产_美女午夜性视频免费_国产精品国产高清国产av_av欧美777_自拍偷自拍亚洲精品老妇_亚洲熟女精品中文字幕_www日本黄色视频网_国产精品野战在线观看 ?

    Taking Confucian Religiousness On Its Own Terms* #

    2018-11-09 03:28:20RogerAMESPekingUniversityUniversityofHawaii
    國際比較文學(中英文) 2018年1期
    關鍵詞:仲尼賢者大者

    Roger T. AMES Peking University / University of Hawaii

    Abstract: The distinguished French sinologist Marcel Granet observes rather starkly that “Chinese wisdom has no need of the idea of God.” Albeit in different formulations, this same characterization of classical Chinese philosophy has had many iterations by many of our most prominent sinologists. One important outcome of taking Granet’s insight into Chinese cosmology seriously is that it will enable us to disambiguate some of the central philosophical vocabulary of classical Chinese philosophy by identifying equivocations that emerge when we elide classical Greek ontological assumptions with those cosmological presuppositions indigenous to the classical Chinese worldview. The philosophical implications of Granet’s seemingly off-hand observation that China did not need the idea of a transcendent God are fundamental and pervasive, entailing as this claim does the plethora of dualistic categories that follow from such a reality/appearance distinction. When we turn to Confucian religiousness, we find that it does not appeal to an independent, retrospective, and substantive Divine Agency as the reality behind appearance and as the source of all cosmic significance. The world is an autogenerative, “self-so-ing” process—ziran er ran 自然而然—that has the energy of self-transformation within it. And human religious feelings themselves are a motor of religious meaning, understood prospectively as an unfolding and inclusive spirituality achieved within the qualitatively inspired activities of the family, the community,and the natural world. Human beings are both a source of and contributors to the numinosity that inspires the world in which we live.

    Keywords: cosmology; ontology; transcendence; ziran; human-centered religiousness; God-centered religion

    The Problem

    In the process of Confucianism being introduced into the Western academy, the key philosophical vocabulary and the terms of art of Confucian religiousness have been overwritten with the values of an Abrahamic religiousness not its own. Indeed, Confucianism in the eyes of many has been reduced to a necessarily anemic, second-rate form of Christianity. Witness the standard formula of translations: tian 天 is “Heaven,” li 禮 is “ritual,” yi 義 is “righteousness,” dao道 is “the Way,” ren 仁 is “benevolence,” de 德 is “virtue,” xiao 孝 is “filial piety,” and so on. In sum, such a vocabulary conjures forth a pre-established, single-ordered and divinely sanctioned cosmos guided by the hand of a righteous God that ought to inspire human faith and compliance.

    There have been subsequent efforts by some scholars to rescue an uprooted and transplanted Confucianism from this Christian soil. But the result has often been to reconstruct its ideas and values through the prism of an Orientalism that would ostensibly save the integrity of Confucianism by dismissing its profoundly religious dimensions, and in so doing, reduce it to a kind of secular humanism. Or perhaps worse, in reading Confucianism’s inclusive and provisional approach to philosophical understanding as unstructured and indeterminate, such interpreters are given to reducing its holistic sensibilities to mysticism and the occult.

    The consequence, then, of this overtly Christianized and then Orientalized reading of the Confucian vocabulary has located the study of this tradition within Western seats of higher learning in religion and area studies departments rather than as a proper part of the philosophy curriculum, and has relegated translations of the Confucian texts to the “New Age” and suspect“Eastern Religions” corners of our bookstores. In attempting to provide a more nuanced explanation of these same Confucian terms, Qian Mu is adamant that this vocabulary expressing the unique and complex Confucianism vision of a consummate life simply has no counterpart in other languages.Qian Mu’s point in making this claim is not to argue for cultural purism and incommensurability; on the contrary, he would allow that with sufficient exposition the Confucian world can be “appreciated” in important degree by those from without. Qian Mu’s claim is on behalf of the uniqueness and the value of a tradition that has defined its terms of art through the lived experience of its people over millennia, and anticipates the real difficulty we must face in attempting to capture its complex and organically related vocabulary in other languages without substantial qualification and explanation.

    Getting Past Transcendence

    Some of the most prominent voices of Western sinology—Marcel Granet, Frederick Mote, Joseph Needham, Angus Graham, and K. C. Chang—share in common the belief that there is a distinctive yet always-evolving way of thinking that needs to be taken into account in understanding a holistic Chinese cosmology. Further, they assert that this dynamic Chinese cosmology posits a world that is naturalistic, autogenerative, and self-construing without appeal to some external metaphysical principle as its unilateral source of order.

    We might take Marcel Granet, the earliest sinologist to give clear voice to this position, as an example. In identifying and articulating the conditions of this early Chinese cosmology, Granet insists that there is “no world of transcendent principles outside the human realm.”If classical Chinese cosmogonies do not take us back to some transcendent source of design, where then does meaning come from? It is the answer to this question that establishes a direct line between the distinctive Confucian role ethics and a Confucian human-centered religiousness.

    A generation ago Herbert Fingarette chose the title Confucius: The Secular as Sacred for a small book that came to have an enormous impact on the understanding of Confucian philosophy within the Western academy. In this monograph and other seminal papers that followed from it,Fingarette argues forcefully that in the Confucian world the “ritualization” and refinement of the roles and relationships that structure family and community enchant the human experience, and stand as the ultimate source of what is sacred.I have argued elsewhere that one way of conceiving the Confucian relationally constituted person is to appeal to the cognate terms, “embodying” (ti體) and “achieving propriety in one’s roles and relations” (li 禮), as the progression through which we become human. It can be fairly argued that it is this same notion of li that can be used to bring Confucian religiosity into clearer focus.

    It is often remarked that “religion” as a term might be derived from the Latin religare meaning “to bind tightly.” One can see how li as a family and communal grammar locating persons in their proper place relative to each other would bind them together, thereby strengthening the fabric of society and encouraging a robust sense of shared meaning and belonging. Although within the Confucian context, li has not been broadly institutionalized as a formal “religion”per se, it still functions to foster a religious quality in the human experience in fortifying our family and communal bonds. A powerful argument has been made by philosophers such as Ralph Waldo Emerson, John Dewey, and most recently, Richard Rorty and Gianni Vattimo, that real religiousness, free from the sometimes suffocating uniformities enforced by formal religious institutions, can only be achieved by giving full expression to our own personal uniqueness, a process that in fact allows for the open informality and the distinctive personalization that are the defining features of li.

    Li is defined in the Shuowen lexicon paronomastically—that is, by phonetic and semantic association—as lü 履 meaning “treading a path,” and hence the continuing narrative of one’s conduct or behavior. Li has been conventionally translated as “ritual,” “rites,” “customs,” “etiquette,”“propriety,” “morals,” “rules of proper behavior,” “achieved propriety in ritualized roles and relations,”and “reverence.” Properly contextualized, each of these English terms can render li on occasion. In classical Chinese, however, the character carries all of these meanings, albeit with differing degrees of emphasis, on every occasion of its use. The compound character li 禮 is an ideograph connoting the presentation (shi 示) of sacrifices to the primarily ancestral spirits at an altar to them (li 豊), suggesting the profoundly religious significance that this term entails.

    Parsed in its narrower but both formal and informal senses, li is how personally to serve the family and communal spirits, both living and dead, to bring about a thriving family and community, with its emphasis being clearly upon human flourishing in this world rather than in the next. This understanding of li as being processional, eventful, and family- and communitycentered is a signature of classical Confucian religiousness in which the focus is on reverence for the continuity of one’s lineage expressed through sincere family feeling and concern (xiao 孝). In its ceremonial form, it is the celebration of people who are now dead rather than any preoccupation with the “worship” of dead people. As Confucius says, “To devote yourself to what is appropriate for the people, and to show respect for the ghosts and spirits while keeping them at a distance can be called wisdom.”O(jiān)ne possible interpretation of this passage would suggest the Confucian philosophy is a kind of secular humanism that resists more elevated religious practices. A better reading I believe would allow that for Confucius, spirituality like most values arises in striving to do what is optimally appropriate for others within family and community, and that formal religious functions are properly instrumental in reinforcing this end. Confucius seems to be making this same point when he responds to his student, Zilu, explaining that the appropriate site for cultivating and expressing our religious feelings is the living world of family and friends:

    Zilu asked how to serve the spirits and the gods. The Master replied, “Not yet being able to serve other people, how would you be able to serve the spirits?” He said, “May I ask about death?” The Master replied, “Not yet understanding life, how could you understand death?”

    We have chosen to translate li in its broadest compass as “striving for propriety in one’s roles and relations.” Again, this rendering is a considered choice. On the formal side, li are those meaning-invested roles, relationships, and institutions that facilitate communication, and foster a sense of community. Most formal and conventionalized conduct that makes social living in our specific roles and relations meaningful constitutes li, including table manners, patterns of greeting and leave-taking, graduations, weddings, funerals, gestures of deference, ancestral sacrifices,and so on. Li are a social syntax that at any one time provides each member with a defined place and status within the family, community, and polity. Just as grammar as a felicitous arrangement of words functions to produce semantic meaning, so li as the attentive coordination of roles and relations conduces to the attainment of social meaning. Li are a hermeneutics of life-forms transmitted from generation to generation as repositories of emerging and compounding meaning,enabling individuals to appropriate persisting values and to make these values appropriate to their own, always unique, situations. While we perform the li in the present, much of their efficacy stems from their being a link to the past and thereby, to the future as well.

    Li is nothing less than “discourse” in its broadest sense where, in its most refined and religious applications, it can be the source of a communal poetry and a cosmic musicality that is so movingly expressed in the latter books of the Zhongyong. In the discursive community,meaning emerges out of the relational virtuosity made possible by effective communication in all of its forms. Given the speciousness of any “l(fā)iteral” metanarrative that would promise to give us access to some foundational truth, all we have is discourse as a currency for productively renegotiating situations as they arise—what Richard Rorty calls our possibility to generate infinite “redescriptions” (or perhaps better in the Confucian case, “represcriptions”)—so that the conversation might continue.Indeed, language becomes poetry in which the text emerges in its full autonomy as what the world really is. As Hans-Georg Gadamer observes, “Here language just stands for itself, it brings itself to stand before us.”What Gadamer means, I think, is that language commands a world into being, and cannot be treated instrumentally and reductively as mere representation of some given reality. Poetic language is presentational more than representational, is inciteful (and sometimes “insightful”) more than referential, is perlocutionary and inspiring more than descriptive. It is in the poetry and in the song occasioned by li that we most immediately and dramatically experience the collaboration between human feeling and its contextualizing horizons as together we create our world.

    Using the Confucian vocabulary itself to reiterate this opportunity for shared communicative growth, Confucius regularly contrasts his notion of socially and politically constituted “exemplary persons” (junzi 君子) with those who fail to cultivate the roles and relationships that locate them in community—what he calls “small or petty persons” (xiaoren 小人). Not only do such “small persons” contribute little to the flourishing of their worlds, but further, their failure to develop the sense of shame and belonging that makes them responsive to others, and thus responsible members of community, can constitute a very real threat to social order.

    Indeed, Vrinda Dalmiya makes a case that “‘not doings’ can be as violent as some doings.”The magnitude of this violence is underscored in Hannah Arendt’s rather thin description of Adolf Eichmann as having been “thoughtless” and “banal” rather than evil, a seemingly mild indictment for a genocidal monster. But Arendt’s point is that Eichmann’s “carelessness”—the tyranny of a shameless individual who “couldn’t care less”—emerges from the empowerment of the actions of a morally retarded person who perpetrates a maelstrom of violence that arises in the absence of thinking and feeling. In a Confucian world, there is a very real sense in which the disintegrative conduct of rude, thoughtless, and shameless persons is the ultimate source of immorality.

    On the informal and uniquely personal side, full participation in a ritually constituted community requires the personalization of prevailing customs, institutions, and values. What makes ritually constituted order profoundly different from law or rule is this hermeneutical process of participating, confirming, and ultimately, reauthorizing the tradition as one's own.Ritual propriety, like most things Confucian, begins at home, and through radial patterns of deference, becomes cosmic in its reach. The performance of li, thus understood, sediments into the human community, defining the appropriate relationships between the present population and its forbearers, and the proper relationships between those who would exercise social and political authority and those who are governed by it.

    Confucian Religiousness: The Flower of Inspired Living

    Elsewhere I have argued that classical Confucianism is at once non-theistic, and profoundly religious.It is a religious tradition certainly with “ghosts and spirits” in the sense of ancestors and cultural heroes and who knows what else, but without a God; it is a religious sensibility that affirms a shared spirituality that emerges out of the inspired human experience itself. There is no parish (except for the extended family), no altars (except for perhaps the dining room table),and no clergy (except for those exemplary models deferred to as the living center of one’s family and community). Confucianism celebrates the way in which the process of human growth and extension is shaped by, and contributes to, the meaning of the totality—a notion of creatio in situ that stands in stark contrast to creatio ex nihilo traditions.

    The Zhongyong or Focusing the Familiar is a short yet seminal text that from Han dynasty times had a prominence as both a chapter in the Book of Rites (Liji) and as an independently circulating text—a stature that was much magnified from the thirteenth century onward when,as one of the Four Books designated by Zhu Xi, it would have been known by heart certainly by every aspirant to civil office and by most Chinese intellectuals as well. It is because the Zhongyong is among the Four Books the most powerful statement of Confucian religiousness that Zhu Xi singles it out as the highest expression of the Confucian project.

    In many ways the Zhongyong is an object lesson in the aggregating radial expression of Confucian religiousness that begins modestly with personal cultivation and culminates in a cosmic transformation. Following Zhu Xi in taking the Zhongyong as a linear and coherent document,we might observe that the cadence of this text in the early sections moves rather listlessly with an expressed concern over the continuing failure of human beings to forge their way effectively in the world. Indeed, an exasperated Confucius laments that, “Alas, this proper way is not being traveled at all!”But once under way, the Zhongyong gradually gathers speed, celebrating both our human capacity and our ultimate responsibility to step up as co-creators with the heavens and the earth in shaping the emergent order of the cosmos. As the text continues, the pace quickens dramatically, declaring that by participating fully in the transforming and nourishing activities of heaven and earth “human beings can take their places as members of this triad,”and in so doing,“can become the complement of tian.”With a final burst of energy, then, the Zhongyong hastens toward its crescendo—its own “Ode to Joy”—in which it quite literally breaks into song, rejoicing in the capacity of consummatory human beings to create meaning and to realize their world.

    In the Chinese cosmology expressed in the Zhongyong, the lived world is the bottomless unfolding of an always-provisional world order according to the rhythm of its own internal creative processes without any fixed pattern or guiding hand. And in the absence of any creator“God,” this Confucian cosmology lifts the bar rather significantly with respect to the degree of creativity expected from the human collaborator. A meaningful world can only be achieved through concerted human effort.

    There are several profound differences between this Confucian religiousness and those Abrahamic traditions that have largely defined the meaning of religion in the Anglo-European cultural narratives and beyond. I would argue that, unlike the “worship” model that defers to the ultimate meaning of some temporally prior, independent, external agency—what F. D. E.Schleiermacher has called religions of “absolute dependence”—Confucian religious experience is itself a product of the flourishing community where the quality of the religious life is a direct consequence of the quality of communal living. And the sacred in Confucianism is not only the root of the flourishing community as it is inherited from past generations, not only the foundation on which the culture is built, but it is also the ongoing achieved quality of inspired living—the blossom and the fruit of human flourishing. It is a human-centered, rather than a God-centered,religiousness that emerges through conscientious attention to refining the human experience through achieved propriety in our roles and relations.

    A second way in which Confucian religiousness is distinct from the Abrahamic traditions is that Confucian religiousness is neither salvific nor eschatological. While it does entail a kind of conversion, it is specifically a transformation of the quality of human life in the ordinary business of the day that not only elevates and inspires our daily transactions, but further extends outward radially from the family and community to enchant the world. The cosmos is wider and deeper and richer when human foraging is elevated to haute cuisine, when stick markings are disciplined into fine calligraphy and breathtaking bronze designs, when coarse gestures are refined to become the sober cadence of ceremony and the exhilaration of the dance, when grunting interventions are amplified into a sublime and haunting melody, when the heat of random copulation becomes the constant and reassuring warmth of hearth and family. It is this transformation—the ordinary and everyday made elegant—that seems at least in part to provide the mystery other expressions of religious feeling find in some transcendent, supernatural appeal.

    There are surely those who would regard a Confucian human-centered religiousness that makes no appeal to a transcendent deity as a much-impoverished sense of religion. They might remain unconvinced that such an alternative human-centered and naturalistic religious sensibility is sufficiently robust to be legitimately labeled “religious” in the first place, lowering the bar so dramatically that it might be better described as a kind of secular humanism. They might dispute my claim that the centrality of the religious aspect of Confucian philosophy with its focus on ritualized living is a viable “a-theistic” religiousness that warrants a vocabulary importantly different from that of theism.

    But a Confucian response to such incredulity might join John Dewey in his critique on more conventional, institutionalized religion, suggesting that a transcendental appeal offers little respite or real relief to the vicissitudes of the human experience:

    Were it a thousand times dialectically demonstrated that life as a whole is regulated by a transcendent principle to a final inclusive goal, nonetheless truth and error, health and disease,good and evil, hope and fear in the concrete, would remain just what and where they are now.

    Dewey is asserting here that claims about a transcendent source do not make any real difference to the world we actually experience. But perhaps he is not going far enough. Might not the Confucian press Dewey’s critique further to insist that there is, in fact, a real cost to transcendence—indeed, a “religious” cost—in that it takes a toll on the possibilities for the disclosure of personal meaning in one’s actual relationships? That is, the power of the family to function as the radial locus for human growth in spirituality might be diminished when natural family and communal relations are perceived as being in competition with, a distraction from,or dependent upon some higher supernatural relations. Said another way, when human relations are subordinated to a personal relationship with a transcendent object of worship, whatever the benefits of such subordination might be, such dividends might well come at a cost to the fabric of family and community. In the Confucian case, it is persons themselves who emerge as objects of profound communal, cultural, and ultimately religious deference. Beyond the achievement of an intense religious quality felt in the everyday experience of their lives, these exemplary persons continue as venerated ancestors for their families and communities, and as contributors to the ancestral legacy—to tian 天—that defines Chinese culture more broadly construed. It is the cumulative investment of ancestors and traditional heroes over time that makes the cultural and the religious legacy determinate and meaningful.

    We have seen that, for the Confucian it is the creative possibility within the inspired human life to enchant the cosmos that is the more important meaning of “religiousness.”This enchantment in the “thoughtful” feelings of family and friends emerges in their mutual and reciprocated sensitivity and awareness. Indeed such appreciation spills over to become “value-added”—quite literally raising the value of the cosmos in which these meaningful relationships mature. Our shared cosmos is much appreciated, becoming a more magnificent time and place because of the profound, indeed, the inspired feelings we come to have for each other.

    Ironically, what might be interpreted as a Confucian challenge to conventional religious institutions and practices might also be read as serving to liberate religiousness in a way not unknown within American revisionist theology. We might be inspired by the early twentiethcentury theologian, Henry Leuba, who insists that:

    Does God really exist? How does he exist? What is he? Are so many irrelevant questions.Not God, but life, more life, a larger, richer, more satisfying life, is, in the last analysis,the end of religion. The love of life, at any and every level of development, is the religious impulse.

    We might also appeal to Emerson’s scandalous, yet wholly inspiring, “Divinity School Address”when he observes that:

    Government, business, art, religion, all social institutions have ... a purpose[:] ... to set free the capacities of human individuals ... The test of their value is the extent to which they educate every individual into the full stature of his possibility.

    Leuba and Emerson before him would both interpret real religiousness as persons achieving the fullest disclosure of their own uniqueness in contributing to cosmic significance and hence to an earned sense of belonging most meaningfully to this same cosmos. In thus creating themselves,they create their world.

    The Nature of Creativity: Confucian Religiousness As Co-Creativity

    I would argue that Confucian religiousness is precisely this sense of co-creativity of self and world, and in fact that such co-creativity is the only kind of real creativity. Indeed,in this Confucian cosmology, nothing happens by itself. To make this argument, I want to explore this notion of co-creativity at several different levels, beginning from the Confucian claim that in our own personal collaborations—in my case, in the delightful intellectual and emotional journeys that I have enjoyed with D. C. Lau, David Hall, and Henry Rosemont—we have done much to create each other. Ascending to a more general level, I want to suggest that in Confucian religiousness, the focus of creativity is the transactional process of human beings shaping and being shaped by their fellow human beings in family and community.

    The several questions that will guide our exploration of our own assumptions about the nature of creativity itself and that will enable us to develop a clearer understanding of how this seminal idea functions within the Confucian tradition are: 1) To what areas of the human experience do we usually apply the notion of creativity? 2) Is there an equivocation when we use creativity and originality, and if so, why? 3) How are the notions of integrity, genuineness, sincerity, and creativity interrelated? 4) What are the roles of feeling and thinking in creativity? and 5) How is“creativity” expressed in a Chinese philosophical vocabulary?

    Let me draw on our translation and interpretation of the Zhongyong to try to respond to these concerns about the nature of creativity. The standard English rendering of the Zhongyong is the 1861 translation of the Scottish missionary, James Legge. It references the earlier Jesuit translations, and has had and continues to have a profound influence on most subsequent European-language interpretations of this text. For Legge, the opening passage provides him with a familiar and uncontroversial account of cosmic order:

    What Heaven has conferred is called THE NATURE; an accordance with this nature is called THE PATH of duty; the regulation of this path is called INSTRUCTION.

    On Legge’s reading of the Zhongyong, this wholly-credible theistic beginning gives way to an unfortunate rambling, and indeed, blasphemous exaltation of human creativity that subverts the very ground of Christian worship. Upon having completed his translation, Legge is prompted to challenge the high estimate that the Chinese tradition has lavished on this text with his own pious reservations concerning its content and its influence. Legge laments:

    It begins sufficiently well, but the author has hardly enunciated his preliminary apophthegms,when he conducts into an obscurity where we can hardly grope our way, and when we emerge from that, it is to be bewildered by his gorgeous but unsubstantial pictures of sagely perfection. He has eminently contributed to nourish the pride of his countrymen. He has exalted their sages above all that is called God or is worshipped, and taught the masses of the people that with them they have need of nothing from without. In the meantime it is antagonistic to Christianity. By-and-by,when Christianity has prevailed in China, men will refer to it as a striking proof how their fathers by their wisdom know neither God nor themselves.

    What is particularly telling about Legge’s honest if scathing evaluation of the Zhongyong is that he is wholly aware of the incongruency between his own theistic interpretation of the opening passage and the celebration of the cosmic magnitude of human creativity conveyed in the remainder of the text, a human creativity that challenges scriptural authority on human dependence upon a Creator God. Legge’s understanding of the thrust of the Zhongyong, whilst wishing it were otherwise, is that human beings led by their sages have in their world everything necessary to achieve their own realization without reference to some transcendent deity, and moreover, that these exemplars so inspire the world around them with human creativity that the heavens and the earth too have no appeal beyond themselves to some more ultimate reality. Cosmic creativity is fully a collaboration between human beings and their world, a cosmology that is consistent with what John Berthrong calls “the world-dependent nature of divine reality.”

    Legge is not without good textual evidence for this human-centered interpretation of the Zhongyong. The opening passage of the Zhongyong emphasizes the capacity and the responsibility of the human world to achieve a creative harmony and balance in the expression of its feelings,and gives an account of how this human achievement conduces to a flourishing cosmos in which all things find their proper place. This radically situated, multilateral creative process is described unambiguously in this text by investing the Confucian term cheng 誠 with cosmic meaning. Cheng is a familiar term usually translated as “sincerity,” “honesty,” or “integrity,” but herein it is used with an unfamiliar cosmological application that has prompted us along with other commentators to consider “creativity” as a possible rendering for it that captures this capacity:

    Creativity (cheng 誠) is self-realizing (zicheng 自成), and its way (dao 道) is selfadvancing (zidao 自道). Creativity references things and events (wu 物) taken from their beginning to their end, and without this creativity, there would be nothing happening. It is thus that, for exemplary persons (junzi 君子), it is creativity that is prized. But creativity is not simply the self-realizing of one’s own person; it is also what realizes other things and events.Realizing oneself is becoming consummate in one’s conduct (ren 仁); realizing the world is wisdom (zhi 知). This is an achieved excellence (de 德) in one’s natural tendencies (xing 性)and is the way of integrating what is more internal with what is more external. Thus, when and wherever one applies such excellence, it is fitting.

    There are other passages in the Zhongyong that celebrate this human capacity to create meaning and to realize a world, characterizing the human being quite literally as a co-creator with the heavens and the earth. The text describes the collaboration between human beings and their social and natural environments in world-making, asserting that there is a profound symbiosis between human and natural creativity:

    Only those of utmost creativity (zhicheng 至誠) in the world are able to get the most out of their natural tendencies (xing 性). Only if one is able to get the most out one’s own natural tendencies is one able to get the most out of the natural tendencies of others; only if one is able to get the most out of the natural tendencies of others is one able to get the most out of the natural tendencies of things and events (wu 物); only if one is able to get the most out of the natural tendencies of things and events can one assist in the transforming and nourishing activities of heaven and earth; and only if one can assist in the transforming and nourishing

    activities of heaven and earth can human beings take their place as a member of this triad.

    The Zhongyong continues, taking this celebration one step further to identify optimum human creativity with sagacity. The virtuosic human being is not only a source of meaning, but of cosmic enchantment. It describes the process and the value of human world-making in full celestial hyperbole:

    Only those of utmost sagacity (zhisheng 至圣) in the world have the acuity and quickness of mind needed to oversee the empire; have the tolerance and flexibility needed to win them the forbearance of others; have the energy and fortitude needed to maintain their grasp; have the poise and impeccability needed to command respect; have the culture and discernment needed to be discriminating. So broad, expansive, and profoundly deep,they demonstrate these several qualities whenever needed. So broad and expansive like the heavens themselves; so profoundly deep like a bottomless abyss: they appear and all defer to them; they speak and all have confidence in what they say; they act and all find pleasure in what they do.

    It is for this reason that their fame spreads out over the Central States, extending to the Man and Mo barbarians in the south and north. Everywhere that boats and carriages ply,everywhere that human strength penetrates, everywhere that is sheltered by the heavens and is borne up by the earth, everywhere that is illumined by sun and moon, everywhere that the frosts and dew settle—all creatures that have breath and blood revere and love them. Thus it is said that they are the complement of tian 天.

    The familiar Confucian claim that “everyone can become a sage” is often read essentialistically as an assertion that sagacity is some universally given potential in human nature that if actualized provides any person with those extraordinary talents through which to affect the world in some incomparable way. But given the Confucian conception of the relationally constituted person, this same claim might alternatively be read as a recognition that optimizing the human experience within the broad social, natural, and cultural context of this processual world described here in the Zhongyong is truly creative and consummatory, and that the spontaneous emergence of real significance in a continuing present within the ordinary business of the day is itself the meaning and content of sagely virtuosity. The potential to become a sage emerges over time within the successful narratives of those persons who become authoritatively human.

    One might attribute Legge’s outrage at what he interprets as unbridled hubris that challenges the very role of the Creator God to his stodgy Scottish “common sensism,” a philosophical movement in Legge’s nineteenth-century Britain. “Common sensism” provided a staunch and steadfast defense of the Christian religious and moral status quo that it took to be the anchor of common sense against a corrosive Humean skepticism. Whatever the source of Legge’s displeasure, this reticence to allow the human being full partnership in cosmic creativity seems to be a common sense that is still very much with us today, and continues to be reflected in more contemporary translations of the Zhongyong. Translators of this text continue to follow Legge in presenting their readers with an unabashedly theistic understanding of the opening passage of the text. But unlike Legge, who is keenly aware of his own Christian assumptions and who thus recognizes the clear disjunction that the Zhongyong has with any theistic understanding of creativity, these interpreters insinuate a familiar conception of Divine creativity into the text, and in so doing, deny any real status to the human collaboration in producing cosmic order.

    When we ask the first of the questions guiding our exploration of creativity—To what areas of the human experience do we usually apply the notion of creativity?—we see that it is invoked most comfortably with reference to the disciplines of the arts and literature, that is, with respect to the entertaining occupations of producing artifice and fiction. But when we turn to the serious business of the day—morality, theology, science, and even “business” itself—“creativity”becomes suspect. If I were to learn that a friend is morally “creative,” while I might properly stand in admiration of his rakish charms, I would also be concerned about his having anything but a passing acquaintance with my comely wife or my innocent children. If our religious neighbors are known to be theologically “creative,” the Pope perhaps more than me is going to be worried about the status of their immortal souls. If a scientific colleague is described publicly as having been“creative” in his experiments with the cloning of human organs, his multi-million dollar grants might well be put at risk. And if my financial advisors have been “creative” in their accounting and I have become unseemly rich as a consequence, I am likely to be audited by the IRS if not jailed first. In the discipline of philosophy itself, one can argue that Gadamerian “play” is philosophically intriguing because it challenges the Aristotelian seriousness and rigor that we have traditionally ascribed to philosophical inquiry. Indeed, what was perceived by many as Richard Rorty’s grinning assault on our discipline banished him beyond the walls of philosophy proper to Stanford’s Department of Comparative Literature and earned him all but excommunication from our professional society.

    In Legge’s critical reading of the Zhongyong, he clearly sees this text’s strident claims about human creativity as a kind of arrogance that pits a Promethean creative sage against the aseity of God. In so interpreting the text, Legge seems to be construing the Confucian sage as heroic—proud, intrepid, solitary—an exemplar apart who accomplishes superhuman feats. For Legge,such human innovation can only be the product of a kind of cunning (sagacitas) as opposed to the wisdom (sophia or sapientia) that belongs properly to God.

    Indeed, we can use the conditions of this creatio ex nihilo notion of creativity, an act of unilateral originality, to distinguish this understanding of creativity from classical Chinese cosmology. First, ex nihilo is dependent upon discrete agency, separating an exclusive creator from its creature. In the processual cosmology of ancient China, situation is always prior to agency. That is, the individual as agent is a conceptual abstraction from concrete, constitutive relationships.Creativity is radically situated and reflexive, where the act of creating and self-creativity are inseparable. Since such creativity is always transactional, to communicate effectively is to participate in the continuing process of reconstituting the world.

    Secondly, ex nihilo focuses on originality as its source of value. In situ creativity on the other hand emphasizes enhanced significance over originality and novelty. Shared relationships that appreciate in meaning are the source of increased significance. In situ creativity is prospective in that it focuses on the productivity of its applications rather than looking back to retrospectively its putative “origins” as its source of value. For natural Chinese cosmology, to the extent that creativity could be isolated and limited to a discrete and independent agent, it would wither in its meaningfulness.

    Thirdly, ex nihilo entails the logical problem of supposedly bringing “some-thing” novel into existence that is absolutely dependent upon its creative source. In itself, the putative “some-thing”is in fact “no-thing.” For in situ creativity, it is the growth of constitutive relationships that is the ultimate source of meaning and that in this process of growth, transforms what is initially inchoate into “something” that is increasingly distinctive.

    Fourthly, the ex nihilo model appeals to a source of novelty that denies history, development,and process. For in situ creativity, on the other hand, it is precisely growth in significance that is the substance of history, and that tells the story of human evolution through the aggregation of episodic, consummatory events. Within the process of in situ creativity, using the language of William James, relations, transitions, and conjunctions are all real.The dynamic nature of creative experience requires appeal to consequences as well as to antecedents, to possibilities as well as to precedents. It is this forward propensity of the human experience that gives it a consummatory possibility. This in situ conception of creativity accounts for both cumulative products of particular experience (a kind of causality), and spontaneous variations that survive because of their consequent efficacy (accumulating significance).

    Finally, ex nihilo creativity appeals to a void beyond the wholeness of experience, whereas in situ creativity entails the indeterminate “nothing” (wu 無) as the constant correlate of the determinate“something” (you 有). Together the determinate and the indeterminate pneumbra constitute the ongoing process of experience. As we have seen, in a tradition in which all beginnings are fetal beginnings (shi 始), there is no notion of “void” but only a fecund receptivity.

    We might take the classical Chinese canons including the Zhongyong as object lessons to illustrate this in situ notion of creativity. Most of the classical texts are not single-authored texts but are rather the work of many hands. Most of these texts borrow liberally and without attribution from the corpus of contemporaneously existing works that give them literary context. They are usually composite documents, with their significance aggregating in lineages that stretch across generations. But the process does not end there. Redactions of these canonical texts are passed on through succeeding generations who then collaborate with these works by appending their own interlinear commentaries that make them relevant to their own time and place, thereby adding new meaning as such annotations accrue across the centuries.

    This commentarial tradition is growth in meaning by generation after generation of scholars correlating the canonical texts with the ordinary affairs of the day. It is this achieved personal,social, and ultimately cosmic harmony rather than any theological or teleological assumptions about origins or design that is their fundamental guiding value.

    Bibliography 參考文獻

    Ames, Roger T. “Death as Transformation in Classical Daoism,” in Death and Philosophy: Reflections on Mortality. Edited by Jeff Malpas and Robert Solomon. London and New York: Routledge, 1998.

    ——. “Li 禮 and the A-theistic Religiousness of Classical Confucianism,” in Confucian Spirituality. Edited by TU Weiming and Mary Evelyn Tucker. New York: Crossroad Press, 2003.

    ——. “War, Death and Ancient Chinese Cosmology: Thinking Through the Thickness of Culture,” in Mortality in Ancient Chinese Thought. Edited by Amy L. Olberding and Philip J. Ivanhoe. Albany: State University of New York Press, 2011.

    Ames, Roger T., and David L. Hall. Focusing the Familiar: A Translation and Philosophical Interpretation of the Zhongyong. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 2001.

    Berthrong, John. Concerning Creativity: A Comparison of Chu Hsi, Whitehead, and Neville. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1998.

    CHAN Wing-tsit. A Source Book in Chinese Philosophy. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1963.

    Dalmiya, Vrinda. “Linguistic Erasures.” Peace Review, 10. 4 (1998): 523–8.

    Dennerline, Jerry. Qian Mu and the World of Seven Mansions. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1988.

    Dewey, John. Middle Works, 1899–1924, 15 vols. Edited by Jo Ann Boydston. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University,1976–83.

    ——. The Essential Dewey (Vol. 1). Edited by Larry Hickman and Thomas M. Alexander. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1998.

    Emerson, Ralph Waldo. The Spiritual Emerson: Basic Writings. Edited by David M. Robinson. Boston: Beacon Press,2003.

    Fingarette, Herbert. Confucius: The Secular as Sacred. New York: Harper and Row, 1972.

    Granet, Marcel. La pensée chinoise. Paris: Editions Albin Michel, 1934.

    James, William. William James: The Essential Writings. Edited by Bruce W. Wilshire. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1984.

    Keightley, David N. “Early Civilization in China: Reflections on How it Became Chinese.” In Heritage of China:Contemporary Perceptions on Chinese Civilization. Edited by Paul S. Ropp. Berkeley: University of California Press,1990.

    Legge, James The Chinese Classics, 5 vols. Hong Kong: University of Hong Kong Press, 1960.

    ——. The Texts of Taoism. New York: Dover, 1962.

    Leuba, Henry. “The Contents of Religious Consciousness.” The Monist, XI: 1901.

    LIU Lydia H. Translingual Practice: Literature, National Culture, and Translated Modernity-China, 1900–1937. Stanford:Stanford University Press, 1995.

    Puett, Michael. To Become a God: Cosmology, Sacrifice, and Self-Divinization in Early China. Cambridge: Harvard University Asia Center, 2002.

    Rorty, Richard. Contingency, Irony, and Solidarity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989.

    ——. Philosophy and Social Hope. New York: Penguin, 1999.

    Rorty, Richard, and Gianni Vattimo. The Future of Religion. New York: Columbia University Press, 2005.

    Rosemont, Henry Jr. Rationality and Religious Experience. La Salle, IL: Open Court, 2002.

    Steele, Dave Ramsey, ed. Genius in Their own Words. Chicago: Open Court, 2002.

    TU Wei-ming. Confucianism in historical perspective. Singapore: Institute of East Asian Philosophies, 1989.

    ——. Confucian Thought: Self as Creative Transformation. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1985.

    Vattimo, Gianni. After Christianity. New York: Columbia University Press, 2002.

    吳樹平: 《風俗通義校釋》,天津: 天津人民出版社,1980年。

    [WU Shuping. A Critical Edition of Understanding the Meaning of Popular Customs. Tianjin: Tianjin Peoples’ Press,1980.]

    猜你喜歡
    仲尼賢者大者
    從“兩彈一星”研制歷史看“國之大者”
    “仲尼”還是“仲泥”?
    讀書(2022年8期)2022-05-30 20:38:20
    閃亮科技人
    詠杏
    不知道有多少水
    心系“國之大者”
    當代陜西(2020年14期)2021-01-08 09:30:20
    常懷國之大者
    當代陜西(2020年17期)2020-10-28 08:17:48
    《弟吳宗教源流》(吐蕃史)譯注(七)
    西藏研究(2019年5期)2019-11-09 06:53:12
    文人天趣清猶水 賢者風期靜若蘭——畫家若蘭寫意畫淺析
    賢者與魔鏡
    日本 av在线| 久99久视频精品免费| 淫秽高清视频在线观看| 国产精品久久久久久亚洲av鲁大| 亚洲一区二区三区不卡视频| 国产在线精品亚洲第一网站| 极品人妻少妇av视频| 桃色一区二区三区在线观看| 久久精品国产99精品国产亚洲性色 | 国产不卡一卡二| 日韩成人在线观看一区二区三区| 亚洲国产看品久久| 国产精品99久久99久久久不卡| 正在播放国产对白刺激| 性欧美人与动物交配| 国产成人精品久久二区二区免费| 午夜精品久久久久久毛片777| 性色av乱码一区二区三区2| 在线免费观看的www视频| 一区二区三区高清视频在线| 少妇 在线观看| 少妇的丰满在线观看| 久久精品影院6| 亚洲最大成人中文| 成人精品一区二区免费| 久久青草综合色| 精品久久蜜臀av无| 两个人视频免费观看高清| 国产蜜桃级精品一区二区三区| 又黄又粗又硬又大视频| 手机成人av网站| 国产成人免费无遮挡视频| 在线十欧美十亚洲十日本专区| 好男人电影高清在线观看| 午夜免费观看网址| 日韩高清综合在线| xxx96com| 老汉色∧v一级毛片| av视频免费观看在线观看| 日本a在线网址| 日本撒尿小便嘘嘘汇集6| 久久热在线av| 午夜两性在线视频| 国产精品免费一区二区三区在线| 电影成人av| 欧美中文日本在线观看视频| 国产精品乱码一区二三区的特点 | 伦理电影免费视频| 亚洲av五月六月丁香网| 婷婷六月久久综合丁香| 麻豆av在线久日| 精品午夜福利视频在线观看一区| 岛国在线观看网站| 一a级毛片在线观看| 叶爱在线成人免费视频播放| 久久久国产成人精品二区| 精品国产国语对白av| 18禁观看日本| 精品久久久久久久毛片微露脸| 在线观看免费午夜福利视频| 午夜日韩欧美国产| 色在线成人网| 狠狠狠狠99中文字幕| 亚洲一区高清亚洲精品| 中文字幕精品免费在线观看视频| 午夜成年电影在线免费观看| 欧美精品亚洲一区二区| 在线永久观看黄色视频| 99riav亚洲国产免费| 成人18禁在线播放| 精品国产亚洲在线| 国产一区二区在线av高清观看| 大香蕉久久成人网| 日日夜夜操网爽| 色哟哟哟哟哟哟| 深夜精品福利| 69精品国产乱码久久久| 国产1区2区3区精品| 老司机靠b影院| 亚洲久久久国产精品| 大香蕉久久成人网| 黄色毛片三级朝国网站| 成人国产一区最新在线观看| 国产精品精品国产色婷婷| 久久中文字幕一级| 久久久久亚洲av毛片大全| 制服诱惑二区| 18禁美女被吸乳视频| 亚洲熟妇熟女久久| 美女高潮喷水抽搐中文字幕| 丁香欧美五月| 女人被躁到高潮嗷嗷叫费观| 一区二区三区激情视频| 色哟哟哟哟哟哟| 亚洲av成人不卡在线观看播放网| 国产av在哪里看| 91成人精品电影| 国产在线观看jvid| 精品人妻在线不人妻| 午夜免费观看网址| 啦啦啦 在线观看视频| 久久久久久大精品| 俄罗斯特黄特色一大片| av视频在线观看入口| 性色av乱码一区二区三区2| 亚洲一码二码三码区别大吗| 色精品久久人妻99蜜桃| 后天国语完整版免费观看| 午夜福利视频1000在线观看 | 美女 人体艺术 gogo| 日本一区二区免费在线视频| 成人精品一区二区免费| 搡老岳熟女国产| 欧美日韩中文字幕国产精品一区二区三区 | 亚洲国产欧美网| 日韩中文字幕欧美一区二区| 19禁男女啪啪无遮挡网站| 在线观看免费午夜福利视频| 欧美日本视频| 男人舔女人下体高潮全视频| 亚洲人成电影观看| 怎么达到女性高潮| av天堂在线播放| 成在线人永久免费视频| 亚洲av电影不卡..在线观看| 精品一区二区三区视频在线观看免费| 视频区欧美日本亚洲| 久久这里只有精品19| 亚洲国产欧美网| 天天躁狠狠躁夜夜躁狠狠躁| 久久精品aⅴ一区二区三区四区| 日韩成人在线观看一区二区三区| 99re在线观看精品视频| 亚洲成人精品中文字幕电影| 亚洲国产精品sss在线观看| 一a级毛片在线观看| 欧美黄色片欧美黄色片| 成人亚洲精品一区在线观看| 美女高潮到喷水免费观看| av在线天堂中文字幕| 亚洲一区高清亚洲精品| 免费在线观看视频国产中文字幕亚洲| 女同久久另类99精品国产91| 久久国产精品影院| 老司机在亚洲福利影院| 97人妻天天添夜夜摸| 欧美不卡视频在线免费观看 | 国产麻豆成人av免费视频| 成人亚洲精品av一区二区| 亚洲第一电影网av| 91精品国产国语对白视频| 搡老熟女国产l中国老女人| 国产精品国产高清国产av| av免费在线观看网站| 一级黄色大片毛片| 午夜福利高清视频| 欧美在线黄色| 亚洲成av片中文字幕在线观看| 免费高清在线观看日韩| 啪啪无遮挡十八禁网站| x7x7x7水蜜桃| 女人被狂操c到高潮| 国产在线精品亚洲第一网站| 在线观看舔阴道视频| 国产亚洲精品久久久久久毛片| 黑人巨大精品欧美一区二区蜜桃| 男人舔女人下体高潮全视频| av有码第一页| 一级片免费观看大全| 国产av又大| 精品无人区乱码1区二区| 在线av久久热| 国产av一区在线观看免费| 国产成人精品久久二区二区91| 国产精品久久久久久人妻精品电影| 久久久久九九精品影院| 性少妇av在线| xxx96com| 亚洲av五月六月丁香网| 丝袜在线中文字幕| 国产一区在线观看成人免费| 亚洲精品美女久久久久99蜜臀| 18禁美女被吸乳视频| 亚洲人成伊人成综合网2020| 亚洲在线自拍视频| 老熟妇乱子伦视频在线观看| 久久久国产欧美日韩av| 给我免费播放毛片高清在线观看| 91精品国产国语对白视频| 亚洲第一av免费看| 亚洲人成电影免费在线| 久热爱精品视频在线9| 久久香蕉国产精品| 亚洲国产精品久久男人天堂| 精品福利观看| 男女下面进入的视频免费午夜 | 国产亚洲精品综合一区在线观看 | 欧美乱色亚洲激情| av免费在线观看网站| 欧美日韩黄片免| 亚洲男人天堂网一区| 一级,二级,三级黄色视频| 婷婷丁香在线五月| 一本大道久久a久久精品| 美女免费视频网站| 国产精品自产拍在线观看55亚洲| 精品熟女少妇八av免费久了| 老司机福利观看| 好看av亚洲va欧美ⅴa在| 动漫黄色视频在线观看| 久热这里只有精品99| 黄色视频,在线免费观看| 久久午夜亚洲精品久久| 人妻久久中文字幕网| 看黄色毛片网站| 免费在线观看影片大全网站| 久久精品国产亚洲av香蕉五月| 俄罗斯特黄特色一大片| 在线观看免费午夜福利视频| 两个人看的免费小视频| 在线观看舔阴道视频| 天天躁夜夜躁狠狠躁躁| 欧美老熟妇乱子伦牲交| 一级片免费观看大全| 两人在一起打扑克的视频| 一卡2卡三卡四卡精品乱码亚洲| 18禁美女被吸乳视频| 免费观看人在逋| 国产极品粉嫩免费观看在线| 亚洲欧洲精品一区二区精品久久久| 熟女少妇亚洲综合色aaa.| 女人精品久久久久毛片| 人妻丰满熟妇av一区二区三区| 一级黄色大片毛片| 欧美av亚洲av综合av国产av| 久久久精品欧美日韩精品| 操出白浆在线播放| 亚洲欧美日韩高清在线视频| 亚洲中文字幕日韩| 日韩精品免费视频一区二区三区| 免费女性裸体啪啪无遮挡网站| 亚洲免费av在线视频| 国产伦一二天堂av在线观看| 久久人人97超碰香蕉20202| 国产一区二区在线av高清观看| 欧美乱妇无乱码| 亚洲欧洲精品一区二区精品久久久| 看免费av毛片| 久久人人97超碰香蕉20202| 久久精品影院6| 亚洲五月婷婷丁香| 免费观看精品视频网站| 女人被躁到高潮嗷嗷叫费观| 亚洲熟妇熟女久久| 久久久国产成人免费| 久久青草综合色| 久久久久久亚洲精品国产蜜桃av| 国产片内射在线| 欧美成狂野欧美在线观看| 亚洲精品国产一区二区精华液| 美女国产高潮福利片在线看| 国产真人三级小视频在线观看| 琪琪午夜伦伦电影理论片6080| 国产精品秋霞免费鲁丝片| 啦啦啦韩国在线观看视频| 亚洲电影在线观看av| 在线观看一区二区三区| 99国产综合亚洲精品| bbb黄色大片| 久久精品亚洲精品国产色婷小说| 婷婷精品国产亚洲av在线| 免费看美女性在线毛片视频| 狂野欧美激情性xxxx| 亚洲午夜精品一区,二区,三区| 国产xxxxx性猛交| cao死你这个sao货| 日本在线视频免费播放| 亚洲人成网站在线播放欧美日韩| 91麻豆精品激情在线观看国产| 亚洲人成电影观看| 日韩欧美国产在线观看| 亚洲精品在线美女| 久久香蕉国产精品| av片东京热男人的天堂| 亚洲自偷自拍图片 自拍| 亚洲国产看品久久| 1024视频免费在线观看| 久久久久久久久免费视频了| 悠悠久久av| 久久久国产精品麻豆| 精品欧美一区二区三区在线| 亚洲一区二区三区不卡视频| 国产又爽黄色视频| 最近最新中文字幕大全电影3 | 亚洲国产精品久久男人天堂| 久久香蕉精品热| 亚洲av成人av| 国产亚洲欧美98| 欧美性长视频在线观看| 精品人妻在线不人妻| 91国产中文字幕| 丝袜美足系列| 色在线成人网| 午夜福利在线观看吧| 国产在线精品亚洲第一网站| 午夜精品国产一区二区电影| 露出奶头的视频| 可以免费在线观看a视频的电影网站| 久久国产精品影院| 亚洲精品美女久久av网站| 波多野结衣一区麻豆| 免费观看精品视频网站| 亚洲伊人色综图| 国产成人精品久久二区二区91| 国产人伦9x9x在线观看| 999精品在线视频| 久久久精品欧美日韩精品| 大码成人一级视频| 久热爱精品视频在线9| 亚洲熟妇中文字幕五十中出| 日本一区二区免费在线视频| 无限看片的www在线观看| 久久婷婷人人爽人人干人人爱 | 国产99白浆流出| 亚洲av日韩精品久久久久久密| 国产成人欧美在线观看| 美女国产高潮福利片在线看| 亚洲av美国av| 青草久久国产| 最新美女视频免费是黄的| 国产高清视频在线播放一区| 嫩草影院精品99| 熟女少妇亚洲综合色aaa.| 在线观看www视频免费| 亚洲无线在线观看| 亚洲欧美精品综合久久99| 精品国产亚洲在线| 视频区欧美日本亚洲| 亚洲成a人片在线一区二区| 一本综合久久免费| 他把我摸到了高潮在线观看| 久99久视频精品免费| 老司机深夜福利视频在线观看| 国产主播在线观看一区二区| 母亲3免费完整高清在线观看| 午夜免费鲁丝| 黑人巨大精品欧美一区二区蜜桃| 国产亚洲欧美在线一区二区| 国产单亲对白刺激| 成人国产综合亚洲| 欧美黑人精品巨大| 亚洲专区国产一区二区| 亚洲久久久国产精品| 在线观看免费午夜福利视频| 免费在线观看视频国产中文字幕亚洲| 深夜精品福利| 极品人妻少妇av视频| 久久精品亚洲熟妇少妇任你| 男女下面进入的视频免费午夜 | 黄色女人牲交| 99精品久久久久人妻精品| 亚洲国产欧美网| 天天躁狠狠躁夜夜躁狠狠躁| 亚洲aⅴ乱码一区二区在线播放 | 啦啦啦观看免费观看视频高清 | 在线观看舔阴道视频| videosex国产| √禁漫天堂资源中文www| 每晚都被弄得嗷嗷叫到高潮| 欧美黄色片欧美黄色片| 香蕉国产在线看| 国产人伦9x9x在线观看| 国产在线观看jvid| 免费不卡黄色视频| av免费在线观看网站| 老汉色av国产亚洲站长工具| 夜夜夜夜夜久久久久| 啦啦啦韩国在线观看视频| av天堂在线播放| 香蕉丝袜av| 两个人看的免费小视频| 欧美黄色片欧美黄色片| 日韩大尺度精品在线看网址 | 9191精品国产免费久久| 日韩欧美免费精品| 亚洲专区字幕在线| 欧美在线一区亚洲| 国产精品98久久久久久宅男小说| 中亚洲国语对白在线视频| 成年版毛片免费区| 18禁裸乳无遮挡免费网站照片 | 久久欧美精品欧美久久欧美| 99久久精品国产亚洲精品| 神马国产精品三级电影在线观看 | 欧美色视频一区免费| 国产一级毛片七仙女欲春2 | 亚洲av片天天在线观看| 俄罗斯特黄特色一大片| 不卡av一区二区三区| 99国产精品一区二区蜜桃av| 一级a爱视频在线免费观看| 久久亚洲真实| 亚洲欧美精品综合一区二区三区| 国产精华一区二区三区| 久久精品91蜜桃| 香蕉国产在线看| 欧美亚洲日本最大视频资源| 在线观看日韩欧美| 日本免费一区二区三区高清不卡 | 在线观看免费视频网站a站| 亚洲男人的天堂狠狠| 亚洲精品久久成人aⅴ小说| 国产激情久久老熟女| 在线永久观看黄色视频| 91老司机精品| 女生性感内裤真人,穿戴方法视频| 国产1区2区3区精品| 露出奶头的视频| 国产熟女xx| 国产伦人伦偷精品视频| 国产乱人伦免费视频| 亚洲精品久久国产高清桃花| 精品一区二区三区视频在线观看免费| 满18在线观看网站| 叶爱在线成人免费视频播放| 国产又爽黄色视频| 色综合欧美亚洲国产小说| 男人舔女人下体高潮全视频| 欧美大码av| 国产精品二区激情视频| 91精品国产国语对白视频| 久久中文字幕一级| 老熟妇乱子伦视频在线观看| 高清毛片免费观看视频网站| 免费在线观看影片大全网站| 很黄的视频免费| 好男人电影高清在线观看| 亚洲国产中文字幕在线视频| 亚洲一区二区三区色噜噜| 性色av乱码一区二区三区2| 日日夜夜操网爽| 色综合站精品国产| 中文字幕精品免费在线观看视频| 亚洲国产精品成人综合色| 国产视频一区二区在线看| 禁无遮挡网站| 日本免费一区二区三区高清不卡 | 变态另类成人亚洲欧美熟女 | 亚洲欧美精品综合一区二区三区| 精品免费久久久久久久清纯| 麻豆一二三区av精品| 两个人免费观看高清视频| 欧美黄色淫秽网站| 国产又爽黄色视频| 日韩欧美国产在线观看| 成人免费观看视频高清| 搞女人的毛片| 桃红色精品国产亚洲av| 国产区一区二久久| 97碰自拍视频| 中出人妻视频一区二区| 美女免费视频网站| 亚洲精品国产色婷婷电影| 巨乳人妻的诱惑在线观看| www.精华液| 精品乱码久久久久久99久播| 国产精品野战在线观看| 丝袜美腿诱惑在线| 老司机在亚洲福利影院| 国产av又大| www.自偷自拍.com| 久久草成人影院| 久热这里只有精品99| 欧美久久黑人一区二区| 成人亚洲精品一区在线观看| 中文字幕高清在线视频| 欧美日韩亚洲综合一区二区三区_| 美女国产高潮福利片在线看| 国产欧美日韩一区二区精品| 免费看a级黄色片| 欧美成人免费av一区二区三区| 国产蜜桃级精品一区二区三区| 人妻丰满熟妇av一区二区三区| 久久精品人人爽人人爽视色| 欧美国产精品va在线观看不卡| 啪啪无遮挡十八禁网站| 国产一区二区三区视频了| 99久久国产精品久久久| 免费少妇av软件| 亚洲欧洲精品一区二区精品久久久| АⅤ资源中文在线天堂| 一本综合久久免费| 国产精品av久久久久免费| 亚洲av片天天在线观看| 国产精品二区激情视频| 丰满人妻熟妇乱又伦精品不卡| 亚洲国产精品sss在线观看| 亚洲人成电影免费在线| 久久国产精品影院| 亚洲av熟女| 国产精品野战在线观看| 午夜免费观看网址| 久久伊人香网站| 国产av一区二区精品久久| 黄片播放在线免费| 亚洲性夜色夜夜综合| 久热爱精品视频在线9| 在线观看日韩欧美| 国产在线观看jvid| 久久热在线av| 亚洲性夜色夜夜综合| 亚洲色图av天堂| 真人一进一出gif抽搐免费| 日韩免费av在线播放| www国产在线视频色| 日韩欧美一区二区三区在线观看| 一级毛片精品| 大型av网站在线播放| 丝袜在线中文字幕| 久久久国产成人精品二区| 在线永久观看黄色视频| 91精品国产国语对白视频| 日本a在线网址| 亚洲中文字幕日韩| aaaaa片日本免费| 久久狼人影院| 国产aⅴ精品一区二区三区波| 国产成人精品在线电影| 一二三四在线观看免费中文在| 无人区码免费观看不卡| 久久亚洲精品不卡| 免费观看精品视频网站| 搡老妇女老女人老熟妇| 亚洲中文字幕一区二区三区有码在线看 | 久久精品亚洲精品国产色婷小说| 国产精品久久久久久人妻精品电影| 国产午夜福利久久久久久| 女人精品久久久久毛片| 国产精品免费一区二区三区在线| 成人永久免费在线观看视频| 久久久久九九精品影院| 最好的美女福利视频网| 人人澡人人妻人| 俄罗斯特黄特色一大片| 日韩国内少妇激情av| 亚洲精华国产精华精| 一二三四在线观看免费中文在| 亚洲av美国av| 这个男人来自地球电影免费观看| 一二三四在线观看免费中文在| 亚洲黑人精品在线| 亚洲欧美精品综合一区二区三区| 这个男人来自地球电影免费观看| 亚洲人成网站在线播放欧美日韩| 久久午夜亚洲精品久久| 国产精品综合久久久久久久免费 | 午夜久久久久精精品| 精品一品国产午夜福利视频| 国产成人啪精品午夜网站| av视频免费观看在线观看| 国产人伦9x9x在线观看| 欧美激情 高清一区二区三区| 怎么达到女性高潮| 美女高潮到喷水免费观看| 精品高清国产在线一区| 黑丝袜美女国产一区| 91九色精品人成在线观看| 久久人妻福利社区极品人妻图片| 国产免费男女视频| 久久久久久久精品吃奶| 亚洲欧美日韩另类电影网站| 久久精品成人免费网站| 久久精品91蜜桃| 69精品国产乱码久久久| 好男人电影高清在线观看| 欧美色欧美亚洲另类二区 | 国产成人欧美在线观看| 久久狼人影院| 正在播放国产对白刺激| 人人妻人人爽人人添夜夜欢视频| 欧美最黄视频在线播放免费| videosex国产| 国产伦一二天堂av在线观看| 高清黄色对白视频在线免费看| 黄色成人免费大全| 一区二区三区精品91| 麻豆久久精品国产亚洲av| 无人区码免费观看不卡| 美女免费视频网站| 日本三级黄在线观看| 亚洲成人国产一区在线观看| 免费在线观看日本一区| 露出奶头的视频| 老司机深夜福利视频在线观看| 色播亚洲综合网| 激情视频va一区二区三区| 99精品久久久久人妻精品| 午夜免费成人在线视频| 久久久国产成人精品二区| 日本 av在线| 久久久久久久久免费视频了| 国产精品九九99| 欧美日本视频| 男女下面插进去视频免费观看| 成年版毛片免费区| 在线观看免费日韩欧美大片| 伊人久久大香线蕉亚洲五| 久久精品国产99精品国产亚洲性色 | 亚洲精品久久成人aⅴ小说| 久久人妻av系列| 嫩草影院精品99| 一边摸一边抽搐一进一出视频| 在线观看午夜福利视频| 久久久久久人人人人人| 欧美黄色淫秽网站|