Reflection on the Unity of the Three Teachings in the Late Ming Dynasty—Centered on the Concept of “Sanhanjiao Is Non-Orthodox Teaching” in The True Meaning of the Lord of Heaven

In his work The True Meaning of the Lord of Heaven, Matteo Ricci not only criticized Buddhism and Taoism but also put forward the viewpoint that “Sanhanjiao is non-orthodox teaching”. The so-called Sanhanjiao actually refers to the three teachings into one established by Lin Zhaoen, so Ricci’s criticism of the three teachings into one, to some extent, is also a criticism of Lin Zhaoen’s “Three-in-One Doctrine”. Ricci used the argument “One Teaching cannot have Three Teachings” to criticize the view of “One Dao, Three Teachings” and also used “it is not possible to forcibly equate the Three Teachings” to criticize the theory of “the Three Teachings are the same”, bringing the perspective of the uniqueness of faith in Western religious culture to China. Ricci’s criticism of the three teachings into one is based on the premise of spreading Catholicism; his argument mainly relies on the logical reasoning of the Western way of thinking, thus ignoring the inherent characteristics of Chinese indigenous culture. However, his viewpoint at least broke the mainstream ideology of “the Unity of the Three Teachings” in the late Ming Dynasty and also provided significant inspiration for the intellectuals of the late Ming Dynasty to reflect on this trend. Ricci’s dialogue with Chinese indigenous religions did not erase the differences between their respective cultures, but actually promoted the integration between Chinese and Western cultures. Therefore, the significance of The True Meaning of the Lord of Heaven lies not only in the dissemination of Catholic thought but also implies a dialogue and cultural transformation between different civilizations.