Xunzi's 'Jie Bi' (Unveiling Concealment): On the Wholeness of the Dao, Cognitive Limitation, and the Fortune of Being Unobstructed
This paper offers an in-depth interpretation of the 'Jie Bi' chapter in Xunzi, investigating the epistemological origins of the 'calamity of obstruction' described by the Pre-Qin philosophers. By analyzing the concept that 'the Dao is constant in its entirety yet utterly transformative,' the essay reveals the dilemma of human cognition being fixated on 'a single corner' and elucidates the transcendental value of Confucius's 'benevolence and wisdom unhindered,' aiming to understand how to escape cognitive bias.
Section 3: Can "Bi" Be Completely Eliminated$26
Another core question: Can "Bi" be completely eliminated$27 Or, as finite beings, are we destined only to see "one corner of the Dao"$28
Master Xunzi seems to hold a relatively optimistic position—he believes that man can "know the Dao" (cognize the entirety of the Dao) through the cultivation of "Xu Yi Er Jing." Master Confucius is the successful example.
However, from Master Zhuangzi’s perspective, such optimism might be questionable. Master Zhuangzi raises a profoundly significant question in "Discussion on Making Things Equal" (Qi Wu Lun):
"My life has a boundary, but knowledge is boundless. To pursue the boundless with the bounded is perilous!" (吾生也有涯，而知也无涯。以有涯随无涯，殆已！)
Life is finite, knowledge is infinite. To pursue the infinite with the finite is perilous. This statement implies that complete "unobscuredness"—the full cognition of the Dao’s entirety—might be impossible for finite beings.
How might Master Xunzi respond to this doubt$29 Perhaps he would say: My concept of "unobscuredness" does not mean omniscient knowledge (that is a divine state, not a human one), but rather, within the limits of human capacity, striving to minimize bias and expand cognition. Master Confucius's "unobscuredness" does not mean he knew everything, but that he was never obscured by any single extreme—he always maintained cognitive openness and comprehensiveness.
This interpretation appropriately downgrades "unobscuredness" from "omniscience" to "non-partial knowledge"—not knowing everything, but not leaning toward any one extreme. This adjustment is reasonable and necessary—because "omniscience" indeed exceeds human capability, but "non-partial knowledge" is something humans can strive for through cultivation.