Grok
----

### 基于熊十力新儒学的核心思想的陈京元“寻衅滋事罪”案分析评论  
### An Analysis of the Chen Jingyuan "Picking Quarrels and Provoking Trouble" Case Based on Xiong Shili's Core Ideas in New Confucianism

**中文版**  
**Chinese Version**

熊十力（1885-1968），现代新儒家创始人，其核心思想以《新唯识论》（*New Treatise on Consciousness-Only*）和《乾坤衍》（*Treatise on the Unfolding of Qian and Kun*）为中心，强调“体用论”（substance-function theory）：体（substance）为仁心本体，用（function）为其动态展开，宇宙万物源于仁心之流行，反对唯物还原论和西方原子主义，主张“仁体流行”（benevolent substance in flux），道德修养通过内省觉醒实现天人合一与社会和谐，视言论自由为仁心表达与体用统一的工具，反对权威独断破坏仁体觉醒。本案中，陈京元博士因X平台转发艺术作品、时政观点等内容（粉丝不足百人、互动近零），被以“寻衅滋事罪”判处有期徒刑一年八个月，程序中充斥主观推定、剥夺自辩与选择性执法。从熊十力视角，此案非仁体和谐，而是外在独断背离体用觉醒：摧毁仁心表达，违背仁体流行与天人合一的根本信念。

Xiong Shili (1885-1968), founder of modern New Confucianism, centered his ideas on *New Treatise on Consciousness-Only* and *Treatise on the Unfolding of Qian and Kun*, stressing the "substance-function theory" (ti yong lun): substance (ti) as benevolent mind-body, function (yong) as its dynamic unfolding, the universe originating from benevolent mind's flux, opposing material reductionism and Western atomism, advocating "benevolent substance in flux" (ren ti liu xing), moral cultivation via introspective awakening achieving heaven-human unity and social harmony, viewing free speech as tool for benevolent expression and substance-function unity, opposing arbitrary fiat disrupting benevolent awakening. In this case, Dr. Chen Jingyuan, an independent scholar, was sentenced to one year and eight months' imprisonment for "picking quarrels and provoking trouble" due to forwarding artistic works and political commentary on X (formerly Twitter)—with fewer than 100 followers and near-zero engagement—amid procedural flaws like subjective presumption, denial of self-defense, and selective enforcement. From Xiong Shili's viewpoint, this is not benevolent substance harmony but external fiat violating substance-function awakening: annihilating benevolent expression, betraying benevolent flux and heaven-human unity.

#### 一、熊十力新儒学核心思想概述：体用论与仁体流行  
#### I. Overview of Xiong Shili's Core Ideas in New Confucianism: Substance-Function Theory and Benevolent Substance in Flux  

熊十力的核心思想是“体用论”：仁心本体（ti）为宇宙根本，用（yong）为其动态流行，反对唯物主义还原，主张通过内省觉醒仁体，实现天人合一与社会和谐，言论自由为仁心表达与体用统一的工具，反对权威独断破坏仁体觉醒。 他强调“仁体流行”，道德源于内在仁心觉醒而非外在强制。 原则：仁体觉醒、动态流行、内省合一，反对独断外求与还原。

Xiong Shili's core ideas are the "substance-function theory": benevolent mind-substance (ti) as cosmic root, function (yong) as its dynamic flux, opposing material reductionism, advocating introspective benevolent awakening for heaven-human unity and social harmony, viewing free speech as tool for benevolent expression and substance-function unity, opposing arbitrary fiat disrupting benevolent awakening. He stressed "benevolent substance in flux" (ren ti liu xing), morality from internal benevolent awakening not external coercion. Principles: benevolent awakening, dynamic flux, introspective unity, opposing arbitrary external seeking and reduction.

#### 二、以熊十力新儒学核心思想评析本案  
#### II. Analysis of the Case Based on Xiong Shili's Core Ideas in New Confucianism  

1. **外在独断背离体用论：违背仁体觉醒与天人合一原则**  
   熊十力视道德仁体流行于动态体用，反对外在权威独断。 本案判决将陈京元转发的情感表达（如讽刺帖）、理性观点（如智库报告）和艺术作品（如漫画隐喻）泛化为“虚假言论”，无证据证明危害，却以主观“明知”推定判“寻衅滋事”，背离体用。 账号数据显示零互动、无仁体断裂，却被“梳理”为“铁证”，这正是熊十力斥的外求：司法未觉醒陈京元仁心意图（学术仁体），而是外在独断，摧毁天人合一。 熊十力若在，必判此不仁体——非觉醒和谐，乃独断暴政。

1. **External Fiat Betraying Substance-Function Theory: Violating Benevolent Awakening and Heaven-Human Unity Principles**  
   Xiong Shili saw morality benevolent flux in dynamic substance-function, opposing external arbitrary fiat. The judgment categorizes Dr. Chen's forwarded emotional expressions (e.g., satirical posts), rational opinions (e.g., think tank reports), and artistic works (e.g., metaphorical cartoons) as "false statements," without evidence of harm, presuming "knowing falsehood" for "picking quarrels," betraying substance-function. Account data shows zero engagement, no benevolent rupture, yet "collated" as "ironclad evidence"—precisely Xiong Shili's external seeking critique: judiciary fails awakening Dr. Chen's benevolent intentions (academic benevolent body), external fiat, annihilating heaven-human unity. Xiong Shili would deem this non-benevolent—not awakening harmony, but fiat tyranny.

2. **权威压制扭曲仁体流行：背离内省觉醒与社会和谐**  
   熊十力强调仁体流行通过包容实现和谐，反对外在独断。 陈京元转发系仁体表达（如复杂系统引用），以仁心包容多元觉醒，却被禁自辩（庭审“闭嘴”）、拒转控控书，程序中“选择性执法”（党媒同类未责）压制觉醒，背离和谐。 这违背熊十力：道德需内在仁体觉醒与流行，非外在规训；社会和谐需包容自由，非独断。 熊十力批判：此案非法，乃对仁体之战。

2. **Authority Suppression Twisting Benevolent Flux: Betraying Introspective Awakening and Social Harmony**  
   Xiong Shili stressed benevolent flux through inclusivity for harmony, opposing arbitrary fiat. Dr. Chen's forwards embody benevolent body expression (e.g., complex systems citations), benevolent inclusivity of diverse awakening, yet he was denied self-defense (courtroom "silencing"), his indictment letter rejected, and selective enforcement suppressed awakening (state media reposts unpunished), violating harmony. This violates Xiong Shili: morality requires internal benevolent body awakening and flux, not external regulation; social harmony needs inclusive liberty, not fiat. Xiong Shili indicts: this is unlawful, war on benevolent body.

3. **仁体觉醒失衡：荒谬警示与和谐危机**  
   熊十力视仁体觉醒为道德基石。 陈京元Bio自嘲“作案工具”，帖文存网无人关注，却判20月，荒谬如熊十力比喻“外求失仁体”——推定“罪名”失觉醒平衡，扭曲仁体，制造危机。 这警示：失衡觉醒，永固外求。

3. **Imbalanced Benevolent Body Awakening: Absurd Warning and Harmony Crisis**  
   Xiong Shili saw benevolent body awakening as morality cornerstone. Dr. Chen's bio mocks his account as a "tool of crime," with posts lingering online unheeded, yet earning 20 months—absurd like Xiong Shili's "external seeking loses benevolent body": presuming "crime" lacks awakening balance, twisting benevolent body, breeding crisis. This warns: imbalanced awakening entrenches external seeking.

#### 三、结语：重振仁体觉醒，推动天人新生  
#### III. Conclusion: Reviving Benevolent Body Awakening for Heaven-Human Rebirth  

熊十力新儒学思想视本案为悲剧：独断背离体用，压制失觉醒，永固外求危机。陈京元自辩如熊十力仁体呼吁，重审恢复道德包容，方能让社会在仁理中新生。 如熊十力所言：“仁体流行。”唯有以此衡，方避“独断”成“公敌”，推动人文觉醒。

Xiong Shili's New Confucianism sees this case as tragedy: fiat betrays substance-function, suppression forfeits awakening, entrenching external seeking crisis. Dr. Chen's defense echoes Xiong Shili's benevolent body call, urging retrial to restore moral inclusivity, allowing society to rebirth in benevolent principle. As Xiong Shili stated: "Benevolent body in flux." Only thus can we avert "arbitrariness" as "public enemy," advancing humanistic awakening.