This is a beautiful and subtle comparison—成己成物 (cheng ji cheng wu) and 為岩中花樹所見 (wei yanzhong huashu suo jian) represent two profoundly different ways of conceiving the relation between self and world, or subject and object, in Chinese philosophy and aesthetics.
Let’s explore each phrase in depth, and then bring out their key differences.
1. 成己成物 (Chéng jǐ chéng wù)
Translation: To complete oneself and to complete things (or To cultivate the self and cultivate things).
Source & Context:
• A key phrase in Confucian and Neo-Confucian discourse.
• Drawn from texts like the Zhongyong (Doctrine of the Mean) and elaborated by thinkers like Zhu Xi and more recently Yang Guorong.
• Related to Yang’s concept of “mutual cultivation of self and things”.
Meaning:
• The self realizes its moral and ontological potential through engaging with the world.
• The world (or “things”) is not inert or external—it is part of the field through which the self develops.
• Cultivating the self (成己) involves becoming morally and ontologically whole.
• Cultivating things (成物) means allowing things (and people, situations, history) to reach their fullest potential through ethical and relational engagement.
Philosophical Character:
• Ethical and relational.
• Anthropocentric but reciprocal.
• Concerned with harmonization, moral flourishing, and co-development.
• Fits within Yang Guorong’s concrete metaphysics and Confucian humanism.
2. 為岩中花樹所見 (Wéi yán zhōng huā shù suǒ jiàn)
Translation: To be seen by the flowering trees in the rocks.
Source & Context:
• This is a poetic, phenomenological expression, evoking Daoist or Chan Buddhist aesthetics.
• Likely draws inspiration from Dōgen, Bashō, Zhuangzi, or Chan kōans, where the subject-object dichotomy dissolves.
• Similar in tone to Dōgen’s line: “To study the Buddha Way is to study the self. To study the self is to forget the self. To forget the self is to be affirmed by all things.”
Meaning:
• The subject does not just look at the world; instead, the subject is looked at by the world.
• This expresses a non-dualist reversal: the human is not the measure or cultivator of things, but is decentered, humbled, seen by the flowers.
• A moment of aesthetic or spiritual surrender—where subjectivity dissolves into immanence.
• The flowering trees, as elements of nature, are not passive—they have their own gaze, their own presence, their own suchness.
Philosophical Character:
• Non-anthropocentric, even anti-anthropocentric.
• Contemplative, poetic, and ontologically quiet.
• Tied to aesthetics of lightness, impermanence, ziran (自然).
• Resonates with Chan, Daoism, Dōgen, and phenomenology of the sacred.
Key Differences:
|
Aspect |
成己成物 (Mutual Cultivation) |
為岩中花樹所見 (Being Seen by Flowering Trees) |
|
Philosophical Tradition |
Confucian (esp. Neo-Confucian, Yang Guorong) |
Daoist / Chan Buddhist / Japanese Zen aesthetics |
|
Orientation |
Ethical cultivation; humanistic metaphysics |
Aesthetic receptivity; non-dualist contemplation |
|
Relation to World |
Active engagement and co-development |
Passive receptivity; self dissolves into world |
|
View of the Self |
Centered, but relational and moral |
Decentered; self is forgotten or absorbed |
|
View of the World (物) |
World is cultivated with and through the self |
World is autonomous; it gazes back at the self |
|
Tone |
Harmonizing, constructive |
Haunting, contemplative, light |
|
Temporal Mode |
Ethical time, historical process |
Timeless moment, poetic eternity |
In Short:
成己成物 is Confucian; it says: “By cultivating myself, I help the world become whole.”
為岩中花樹所見 is Daoist or Zen; it whispers: “I vanish, and in that vanishing, I am seen by the flowers.”
Would you like me to write a haiku that captures the spirit of 為岩中花樹所見? Or trace how Zhuangzi and Bashō might both echo this sensibility?
