1 Introduction

This section introduces Lukyanov's original interpretation of "Zhong" (the Mean) from the perspective of the study of civilizational origins, and points out that no specialized research on this topic yet exists domestically.

2 Overview of Lukyanov's Research on the Zhongyong

This section introduces Lukyanov's complete academic journey and core contributions in his fifteen-year sustained effort to deeply interpret the "Zhong" doctrine of the Zhongyong through multiple perspectives, beginning with his 1998 Russian translation Following the Mean, proceeding through the combined translation of the Four Books, his 2003 translation and research monograph, and culminating in the systematic integration of 2017.

3 Lukyanov's Interpretation of the "Zhong" Doctrine

Lukyanov locates the source of ancient Chinese philosophy in the culture of "Dao," noting that this "Dao" encompasses both the Daoist and the Confucian "Middle Way"; to clarify the "Middle Way," he concentrated his research on the Zhongyong, identifying the "Zhong" doctrine as the key to unlocking the patterns of emergence and evolution in Chinese philosophy. This chapter first lists more than ten Russian translations of the Zhongyong title, demonstrating the diverse understandings of the "Zhongyong" concept in Russian and Chinese scholarship, noting that Brov was the first to use the term "'Zhong' doctrine," which Lukyanov inherited and expanded.

The chapter then reviews the eight translation equivalents proposed by Lukyanov: Chzhun iun (phonetic transliteration preserving the original form), Sledovanie seredine (Following the Mean, emphasizing the meaning of "yong" as adherence), Uchenie o seredine ("Zhong" doctrine, highlighting the philosophical category), Dao i zakon (Dao and Principle, taken from Zhu Xi's commentary), Dao serediny/Sredinnoe Dao (Middle Way, revealing the common origin of Confucianism and Daoism), Puls serediny, Ritm serediny, Kolokol serediny (metaphorical translations, using pulsars and church bells to interpret the rhythmic and ordering functions of "Zhong," which though ultimately not adopted, provided new cognitive pathways). The author notes that the choice of translation directly reflects the researcher's standpoint and method; Lukyanov consistently maintained "Zhong" as his focal point, attempting to elaborate it from cosmological, philosophical, and cultural dimensions.

The chapter further discusses Lukyanov's interpretation of the core content of the "Zhong" doctrine. He cites the opening chapter of the Zhongyong—"Before the feelings of pleasure, anger, sorrow, and joy are aroused, it is called zhong; when they are aroused and all attain due measure, it is called he"—as his guiding principle. Through comparing the differences between Brov's and Lukyanov's translations, three innovations are revealed: first, Lukyanov translates "fa" (aroused) as razoitis' (to disperse), treating "pleasure, anger, sorrow, and joy" as the gathering and dispersing movements of cosmic qi (pleasure—anger, sorrow—joy), connecting natural cosmos with social order and embodying the unity of substance and function; second, Lukyanov defines "he" (harmony) as po ritmam pulsa serediny (according to the pulsing rhythms of the Mean), linking the measuredness of mind-and-nature emotions with cosmic breathing, demonstrating the inseparability of "zhong" and "he"; third, Lukyanov literally translates "the great root of the world" as "the great root of Heaven—zhong," employing the pulsar image to depict "zhong" as a spontaneously pulsing cosmic origin point, releasing the "Dao" of harmony, thereby establishing a trinitarian cosmogony of "zhong—he—heaven and earth."

The chapter also notes that Lukyanov further integrates the Confucian natural cosmology and moral cosmology into a socio-natural cosmology, which stands in dialectical unity with the Daoist natural-social cosmology; he argues that the "five elements" structural-functional prototype was not invented by philosophers but was a ready-made heritage of pre-philosophical culture, absorbed by Confucianism as the cosmological foundation of the "Zhong" doctrine. Through these multiple translations and cosmological constructions, Lukyanov forges the opening chapter of the Zhongyong into a comprehensive outline connecting natural rhythms, ethical order, and cosmic generation, demonstrating the depth of Confucian philosophy with "zhong" as the unified nexus of ontology, epistemology, and ethics.

4 Conclusion

This section explores how Lukyanov, with "Zhong" at the core, connects Confucianism and Daoism, proposes innovative views such as cosmic energy pulses, fills a gap in Russian Sinology, and promotes Sino-Russian dialogue.