The previous cycle of lectures focused on identifying the founding elements of Chinese civilization, and in particular what formed its foundation and armature, namely what we called anthropocosmic continuism, of which ritualistic culture and ancestral worship are among the most central and enduring expressions. Last year's lecture inaugurated a new cycle by radically shifting the point of view and looking at Chinese civilization from the outside in. What better way to do this than from the perspective of its immediate neighbors, the Indian world on the one hand, and Japan on the other ? This is a subject of current relevance if ever there was one, at a time when China presents itself - and is perceived by the rest of the world - as being on the rise, and in a position to assert a claim to universality that it would have exercised over its periphery for centuries. Recent events, which demonstrate China's tendency to confuse its claim to universality with its hegemonic ambitions, are further proof of the importance of in-depth reflection rooted in a critical perspective and a long-term historical memory.
In the patient investigative work we have undertaken, far from journalistic clichés and hasty generalizations, we had to start by assessing the validity of the centric, centripetal and centralizing vision elaborated by the Chinese world in its civilizational project. Shouldn't we go beyond this representation, which, however prevalent and tenacious it may have been, has most often been contested and even thwarted by the reality of the facts ? Is it justified to speak of " China " as if it had always been a massive, self-referential and self-sufficient entity, as it claims to be today ? Shouldn't we be asking ourselves about the various ways in which it has apprehended, sought (or not) to know and understand the world, to situate and locate itself in a space larger than itself, to enter into relations or be confronted with other realities, even if it means being shaken in its very foundation ? In short, isn't it time to consider China in terms of its relationship with the world, rather than as a world in itself ?