This paper investigates the essence of the conception of ghost and spirit (gui-shen) of Neo-Confucianism centering on Chu Hsi’s sayings. Neo-Confucianism holds that the topic of ghost and spirit is not the most important but belongs to so-called “the second-order”. On the one hand, Neo-Confucianism refuses such ghost and spirit as the secular says. On the other hand, it believes there is the principle (li) of ghost and spirit. That is to say: Neo-Confucianism regards ghost and spirit as one kind of speculations (li) instead of a concrete thing (wu, shi). According to Neo-Confucianism, the topic of ghost and spirit should not be discussed from a view of existence. It is mainly meaningful to the ethical practice. These points just form the characteristics of the conception of ghost and spirit of Neo-Confucianism. As to the motive, such conception is held to differentiate the Buddhist and secular beliefs in the existence of ghost and spirit, and to emphasize Confucian stand.
This paper discusses the methodology of Chinese classical hermeneutics, taking one of the main Han-Song controversies, i.e. the different interpretations on Analects 12:1 between the Han school and the Song school. After comparing in detail the interpretations on keji (self-discipline) of both sides, the author holds that the interpretation of Han school is actually under-interpretation, though the Han school regards the interpretation of Song school as over-interpretation. This paper questions the traditional view, which believes the Han school is superior to the Song school on the classical interpretations.
