| Abstract: | Conclusion The main reasons for the difficulty in understanding and translatingcheng may be summarized as follows. First, its prehistory is not always clear. This makes it troublesome to identify its original
meaning. Second, the multiple sources from the three schools, Confucianism, Daoism, and Buddhism, often causecheng to be entangled with various concepts specifically affiliated to certain schools. The particular meanings of these concepts
and their connections withcheng possibly mislead our effort to explore the core content ofcheng as such. Finally,cheng has been described as a force causing either “transformation” or “change.” In the former case, its influence is often exaggerated,
while in the latter, it appears, more or less, mystical. However, despite all the complexity, the core content ofcheng is still identifiable. It consists of what two English terms-“sincerity” and “reality”-convey. In general, the termcheng can be properly applied to a person or thing so long as either one of them or the unity of them is present. |
