沃格林在《天下时代》一书中，依据“实在”进程中的不同形态，构建了一套关于“天下时代”的世界历史叙事。“天下时代”实际上勾勒出一幅动态图景，即通过“精神天下”与“现实天下”的重新组合，以超越论的模式将“ecumene”（人居大地）这一符号再度等价于荷马时代的宇宙论经验。然而，在触及“中国天下”问题时，这一叙事的核心原则面临着挑战。概言之，中国的历史经验难以契合超越论模式中的天下观，因而也无法将自身分化为“精神天下”与“现实天下”，这一点在赵汀阳对于天下概念的重构中得到清晰的展现。中国古代文本中的“天下”与沃格林分析的“ecumene”在字面义上虽能形成对应，但两者指向着不同的经验类型。依据这类经验，尤其是对于存在问题的不同组织方式，不同的天下叙事不仅呈现出形态差异，最终得到的历史理解也将变得极为不同。

天下, 历史, 超越者, 动态存在, 共可能秩序

In his book“The Ecumenic Age”, Eric Voegelin constructs a world-historical narrative about the “Ecumenic Age” by analyzing different configurations in the process of “reality”. The concept of the “Ecumenic Age” actually outlines a dynamic picture, which, through the recombination of the “spiritual ecumene” and the “pragmatic ecumene”, re-equates the symbol of “ecumene” (inhabited earth) with the cosmological experience of the Homeric age in a transcendental model. However, when it comes to the issue of “Chinese Tianxia”, the core principles of this narrative face challenges. In summary, China’s historical experience is difficult to fit into the transcendental view of Tianxia, thus it cannot differentiate itself into “spiritual ecumene” and “pragmatic ecumene”. This is clearly demonstrated in Zhao Tingyang’s reconstruction of the Tianxia concept. Although “Tianxia” in ancient Chinese texts and Voegelin’s analysis of “ecumene” correspond in their literal meanings, they are oriented towards two different types of experiences. Based on these experiences, especially in the ways of organizing the question of “Being”, the two narratives of Tianxia not only present diverse forms but also lead to fundamentally different historical understandings.

Tianxia, history, transcendence, dynamic “Being”, co-possibility order