This article carefully analyzes Zhu Xi’s view of the classics by evaluating two of the philosopher’s basic premises: that classics are “books of the sages” and that reading the canon not only enables one to understand the constancy of Tian Li (cosmic texture/order) but itself aims at learning the sages’ wisdom. In addition, the author compares Zhu Xi’s mode of thought with ontological hermeneutics and points to a number of fundamental differences between the two. Zhu Xi believes that the central value of the classics lies in their status as works of the sages, ancients who perfectly embodied the Tian Li of selfless good. In Zhu Xi’s opinion, it is possible for readers to grasp the original meaning of the classics because they and the authors share common human nature and “universalistic” truth. Yet ontological hermeneutics has departed from that stance, emphasizing the inherent limitations, historicality and subjectivity of human understanding. On one hand, Zhu Xi acknowledges these limitations, but on the other he discusses the enlightened and selfless state achieved by the sages as a witness of the possible unity of Tian Li and human beings. It is only through a mindset of true selflessness that Tian Li can be fully, naturally, and freely expressed and thus receives proper recognition from the people as the highest ideal. This kind of sagely learning does not appear on the analytical “horizon” of ontological hermeneutics; the difference lies in the latter approach's belief in the indispensable and unsurpassable self. The ancients view a state of “selflessness” as the most worthy of pursuits and thus underscore the “universalistic” significance of Tian Li and the good of human nature. In contrast, ontological hermeneutics stresses the subjectivity and shortcomings of individual perception and human existence.