Wild Fox Confucianism: Obscuration (Bi 蔽), Self-Certification, and the Problem of Discernment in Late Ming Confucian Religiosity

Wang Yangming 王陽明 (1472–1529) held that innate moral knowing (liangzhi 良知) knows every concern that arises, yet a person can obscure it, so that “though he may be said to know, he still does not know.” Studies of this puzzle have explained how liangzhi detects self-deception. I take up a harder question, asked by Wang’s student Ouyang De 歐陽德, who feared that a person might “take the thief for one’s son.” Even if liangzhi never errs, a person’s claim to speak from it can be wrong, and his certainty cannot settle the matter. Authenticating such a claim is a religious problem of discernment, distinct from the philosophical problem of self-deception and from the assessment of conduct. Chan Buddhism met it with the master’s seal, which gave another person standing to judge such a claim, a standing I call adjudicative externality. Wang’s teaching made room for such checks, but in the “ready-made liangzhi” of Wang Ji 王畿 a claim to awakening could become a claim to be beyond correction, which late Ming critics called kuangchan 狂禪. Ledgers of merit, and the societies that reviewed them, met this danger without certifying anyone’s awakening. Whatever a person claimed to have realized, his acts remained on the record.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Religions
Published
2026-10-30
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/rel17111273
Primary Topic
Chinese history and philosophy
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Wild Fox Confucianism: Obscuration (Bi 蔽), Self-Certification, and the Problem of Discernment in Late Ming Confucian Religiosity

Zizheng Lv
Religions
Chinese history and philosophy
article

Wild Fox Confucianism: Obscuration (Bi 蔽), Self-Certification, and the Problem of Discernment in Late Ming Confucian Religiosity

Zizheng Lv
article en

Abstract

Wang Yangming 王陽明 (1472–1529) held that innate moral knowing (liangzhi 良知) knows every concern that arises, yet a person can obscure it, so that “though he may be said to know, he still does not know.” Studies of this puzzle have explained how liangzhi detects self-deception. I take up a harder question, asked by Wang’s student Ouyang De 歐陽德, who feared that a person might “take the thief for one’s son.” Even if liangzhi never errs, a person’s claim to speak from it can be wrong, and his certainty cannot settle the matter. Authenticating such a claim is a religious problem of discernment, distinct from the philosophical problem of self-deception and from the assessment of conduct. Chan Buddhism met it with the master’s seal, which gave another person standing to judge such a claim, a standing I call adjudicative externality. Wang’s teaching made room for such checks, but in the “ready-made liangzhi” of Wang Ji 王畿 a claim to awakening could become a claim to be beyond correction, which late Ming critics called kuangchan 狂禪. Ledgers of merit, and the societies that reviewed them, met this danger without certifying anyone’s awakening. Whatever a person claimed to have realized, his acts remained on the record.

ReligionsVol. 17(11)
University of British Columbia (CA)
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Chinese history and philosophy
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon