Assignment First

澳洲西雪梨大学论文代写:天命概念

天命概念在朝鲜、越南等国家也有一些影响。这些国家都受到中国文化的影响。统治者必须采取负责任的行动,因为他们害怕失去他们的地位,如果他们不只是在国家的臣民。它被认为能够明智的皇帝执政在中国受人尊敬的天堂和被珍视,对受试者的尊重。上帝和他们在一起,受试者得到了喘息的机会。这是不太可能的皇帝造成的苦难和痛苦的人永远(格兰维尔,2010)。
天命的另一个重要部分是统治者不需要贵族出身,而皇帝可能是有共同出生的人。这一方面表明,基于遗产的人们之间没有差别。一个非常普通的人也有类似国王的权利。

澳洲西雪梨大学论文代写:天命概念
天命是类似于国王的欧洲权利,它也被用来合法化规则使用神圣的批准。在中国的天命中,中国的天命远远超过了欧洲国王的权利,如果皇帝腐败或不公正,臣民有权推翻帝国。这有助于带来革命。另一个不同之处是,无论是贵族出身还是普通出生,上天的任务都是与全国人民的。欧洲国王的权利并非如此。在这个上帝允许给予只有一个家庭的统治者不管统治者的行为(卫斯理,2008)。

澳洲西雪梨大学论文代写:天命概念

The concept of Mandate of Heaven had several effects in countries like Korea, Vietnam also. There countries were within the influence of Chinese culture. The rulers had to act responsibly as they had the fear of losing their position if they were not just to the subjects in the country. It was believed that the capable and wise emperors ruling in China respected Heaven and were cherished, respected by the subjects. The subjects had respite that God was with them. It was unlikely for an emperor to inflict misery and pain to the subjects perennially (Glanville, 2010).
Another major important part of the mandate of heaven was that the ruler need not be of noble birth only rather the emperor might be someone who had a common birth. This aspect showed that there was no difference among the people based on the legacy. A very common man also had similar right to be the king.
The mandate of heaven is similar to the European rights of the kings as it was also used to legitimize rule using divine approval. The Chinese mandate of heaven was far superior to the European rights of the kings as in Chinese mandate of heaven, the subjects had the power to overthrow the empire if the emperor was corrupt or unjust. This helped in bringing revolutions. Another difference was that mandate of heaven was with all the people in the country irrespective of the fact whether they are noble birth or the common birth. This was not the case with the European rights of the kings. In this God granted permission to only one family to be the ruler regardless of the ruler’s behavior (Wesley, 2008).