PART I

 

THE CONCEPT OF MORAL PURIFICATION

IN CONFUCIAN PHILOSOPHY

 

 

 

 

Chapter 1

THE PROBLEM OF HUMAN NATURE

 

Confucius, named K’ung Ch’iu (551-479 B.C.), is the foremost Chinese philosopher. His teachings, which included the books he edited, molded Chinese civilization. He was basically concerned with ethics, not with metaphysics or religion. “His discourses about man’s nature, and the way of Heaven, cannot be heard,” one of his disciples said. 1 Actually, Confucius did explicitly mention man’s nature once -- when he said that “by nature, men are nearly alike; by practice, they get to be wide apart.” 2

But, he did not further discuss what that “alikeness” is, good or evil. Thus that on statement is wide open to interpretation.

Confucius did not write much, and after his death, his school did not flourish. It was Mencius, or Meng K’o (c.371-c.289 B.C.), who revived the Confucian School by proclaiming Confucius as the greatest sage. He systematized the Confucian teachings and expanded them. Another notable Confucian philosopher, Hsun-Tzu -- aka Hsun Tze, named Hsun Ch’ing – came later (c.298-230 B.C.) to promote Confucian philosophy further.

Mencius was a disciple of Confucius’s grandson Tzu-Ssu; Hsun-Tzu was later than Mencius. Both of them did not know Confucius personally. The great historian, Ssu-ma Chien, Wrote a biographical sketch in Shi-Chi, called it “Biography of Men and Hsun”, thus put them together.

Interestingly enough and rather ironically, Mencius and Hsun-Tzu both gave great attention to the matter of human nature, in contrast to their Master. Their views, however, differed widely. And it is these views we will examine now, for they are relevant to considering the concept of moral purification.

 

Note: In the forthcoming discussions, please remember that in Chinese, as in many languages derived from ancient patriarchal societies, including English, the word “man” ( 人 ) applies not only to a single male person, but also to human beings in general or humankind, and to a generic individual (like “one”), whether male or female. When the word refers to women in general or in the singular and particular, it is specially indicated.

 

Is There a “Human Nature”?

When discussing the importance of education to human life and society, two assumptions must be established: (1) human nature is educable; and (2) there is a need for education. In the twentieth century, however, a trend was initiated that denies even the existence of such a universal entity as “human nature,” which sets Homo sapiens apart from other Earth-dwelling species and assigns to it certain mental, behavioral, and spiritual characteristics.

Mortimer Adler states that this relativism is the existentialists’ root error.

Merleau-Ponty, for example, has declared that “ It is the nature of man not to have a nature.” … [T]he denial of human nature is a profound mistake – one with extremely serious consequences for philosophy, especially moral philosophy. 3

  Any meaning or purpose in education is based on the fact that human beings do have something in common. This distinctive identity can be called human nature, and from ancient times to now, and from one contemporary culture to another, little variation can be discerned among the inherent physical and psychological needs of individual persons. The same needs, in much larger ways, exist in human societies.

  When certain principles and behaviors are acknowledged as important for learning, education becomes a purposeful undertaking. It takes place intensively among the young in the socialization process, but it also lasts throughout one’s lifetime. We can never learn too much about anything or everything. Especially, as co-dwellers in society, we can never learn too much about how best to treat other people, so that we in turn will be well treated by them.

  However, if we do not believe that things in the same category have certain traits in common -- meaning the same nature, whether this involves physical aspects or behavioral responses -- we cannot then make the accurate predictions we need for success in our endeavors, whether this involves scientific studies or building or maintaining a healthy society. If we do not believe that there is something called human nature, it follows, then, that we cannot find a common moral ground for humanity. If we do not acknowledge the presence of good and evil, in ourselves and in others, and seek prescriptive knowledge for improvement, there will be no sure way for us to better ourselves and society through education.

  Now let us examine in some detail how Confucian philosophers looked at human nature.

 

Mencius’s Theory of Human Nature

  Chinese philosophers in the Confucian school never questioned whether or not human nature exists. Instead, they argued about the nature of human nature ( 性 ) -- whether it is essentially good or evil. The character 性 , when used in this context, means human nature, both individually and universally.

  Mencius made a clear and workable definition of this word:

1. Nature needs to be categorized. It cannot be that “what is inborn is called Nature.” That is too general: the nature of a dog, or of an ox, is not the same as the nature of a man. And the nature of man would be the object of study. 4

Thus Mencius narrowed down and limited the scope of his discussion to human nature. As for what it consists of --

2. This nature should not judged by the situation. For instance, if in the winter we drink things hot, in the summer cold, we do so because of the temperature change outside; but our need to drink remains the same. 5 Which is to say: although people act differently from each other, this does not mean that their basic natures are not similar.

  Then the question inevitably arises: Why are there so many types of people in the world? Even descendants of the same father differ from each other like day and night. Some distinguish themselves by moral excellence and ability, like the good Shun; whereas others are morally rotten to the core and seemingly incurable, like Shun’s half-brother, Hsiang. Such discrepancies in morality imply that human nature is neither good nor evil. Mencius’s answer to this is --

3. Human nature is not neutral, nor should it be judged by the behaviors of particular individuals. Such differences are caused by outside influences. As to the goodness of human nature per se, we originally have it with us, “only we do not think [to find it.]” 6

Thus it follows that --

4. Everyone has the potential to be a “superior man.” “It is not only the worthies alone who have this moral sense. All men have it, but only the worthies have been able to preserve it.” 7

  But this potentiality for worthiness is far from the discouraging reality of defective humans whom we encounter daily. How might we explain this experience and also bridge the chasm between inferior and superior beings? Mencius’s theory of the development of human goodness provides the answer. For a plant to develop, there must be a seed or stem. Mencius offers just that:

5. There are “four-stems” of human nature. “The sense of commiseration [misericordia], is the stem of humanity; the sense of shame and dislike [evil] is the stem of righteousness; the sense of respect and reverence is the stem of propriety (Li); the feeling of right and wrong is the stem of wisdom.” If we follow this four-stem aspect of our original nature, we are naturally able to do good. 8

Then Mencius indicates how one might develop these stems to full fruition:

6. Above all, we must realize the importance of learning, repent for our misdeeds and return to the right way. We start from here: “The way of learning is none other than finding the lost heart [mind].” 9

  To Mencius, the most lamentable thing in the world is someone who has gone astray but has no desire to return to the right pathway.

  But he is not so naïve as to leave us here. He exhorts people to make plans, cultivate and persevere -- and hence carry forward this aim to grow into full maturity. He points out that although grains may be good seeds, after their planting and before harvest time, the plants that sprouted from them seem worse than tares and weeds. The way leading to maturity, according to Mencius, is --

7. The right methodology. He uses the analogies of archery and carpentry for learning. An archer must set a target (his will) and then put full effort into hitting it. Just as a carpenter uses a compass and square to do his work, one must have moral standards, who are the sages and superior men. 10

  Though he himself has made many futile attempts to teach his contemporaries, Mencius cautions us to persist. This exhortation to keep the correct positive attitude is based on his firm conviction that human nature is intrinsically good. He believes that--

8. The goodness of human nature will prevail. Mencius’s confidence in human goodness makes him an optimist. Goodness is like water, while evil and desires are like fire. Because of its very nature, goodness will ultimately conquer evil. He likens the moral state of the world to a wagonload of fuel on fire. How can one pour a cup of water on the flames and expect to quench them all at once? Yet we have the obligation and responsibility to try to put the fire out, somehow. If we sit back and give up altogether, this attitude will only to help the evil grow. Doing nothing, then, should be counted as cruel. 11

  This analogy sets the basic tenet of Confucianism: develop the goodness in oneself to the fullest, and then improve society with all one’s wisdom and might. Enlightened Confucianists therefore regard tending to the well-being of society as a personal duty.

 

Hsun Tze’s Theory of Human Nature

  Diametrically opposite to Mencius’s theory is that of another famed Confucian philosopher. Hsun Tze, or Hsun Ch’ing, insists that human nature is originally evil. He says:

The nature of man is evil; the goodness is only acquired training. 12 The original nature of man to-day is to seek for gain. If this desire is followed, strife and rapacity results, and courtesy dies. Man originally is envious and naturally hates others. If these tendencies are followed, injury and destruction follows; loyalty and faithfulness are destroyed. Man originally possesses the desires of the ear and eye; he likes praise and is lustful. If these are followed, impurity and disorder result, and the rules of proper conduct (Li) and justice (Yi) and etiquette are destroyed…. Therefore the civilizing influence of teachers and laws, the guidance of the rules of proper conduct (Li) and justice (Yi) is absolutely necessary. 13

  Unlike Mencius, who believes that man is capable of doing good “just as water flows downward naturally,” Hsun Tze maintains that man’s doing good comes only from working to make it go upward -- which is unnatural to its intrinsic nature. This effort to keep humans morally in order can be undertaken through education, imposed by laws, or reinforced with religious or ceremonial rites. Therefore Hsun Tze exhorts people to learn how to develop in the proper way – which is actually against human inclination:

Now the original nature of man is really without the rules of proper conduct (Li) and justice (Yi), hence he strives to learn and seeks to have it…. Then only are they developed. 14

  Why does not everybody try to develop in the right or moral way? Because, says Hsun Tze, one must have the will to cultivate oneself and gradually develop proper conduct. Hsun Tze likens the nature of man to a horse: to be made docile, it requires training. Bits and bridles must be used to rein in the animal spirits; also whips must be applied at times. And to run in the right direction, a horse must have a master guiding and controlling it. For this reason, the sage kings of antiquity set the laws and directives.

  On the other hand, to instill moral codes internally, people need an effective education and beneficial socialization. So when determined to cultivate a moral character, one must choose friends wisely and search for good teachers. 15

  Like Mencius, Hsun Tze emphasizes that righteousness and justice (yi), should be the goal of education. Any desire for materialistic profit or ambition for high position should be purified:

If a person’s will is cultivated, then he can be prouder than the rich and the honorable; if he has emphasized the right way (Tao), and justice (Yi), then he can despise kings and dukes; he can contemplate that which is within him and despise other things. It is said: the superior man employs things; the small-minded man is the servant of things -- this expresses what I mean. 16

    Hsun-tze never did claim himself to be a prophet from God. Yet he exhibited that he had an exceptional analytical power, something like John Calvin, and is no less than a poet-seer. However, Hsun-Tze lacked the insight of “original sin”, thus he did not see the human total corruption; therefore, he could not reach the height of salvation.

 

Education as a way to Morality

  We have seen how Mencius and Hsun Tze greatly differ in their theories of human nature and their methods of achieving goodness. Yet their goal is almost identical. Fung Yu-lan has aptly summed it up:

According to Mencius, man is born with the “four beginnings” of the four constant virtues. By fully developing these beginnings, he becomes a sage. But according to Hsun Tzu, man is not only born without any beginnings of goodness, but, on the contrary, has actual “beginnings” of evilness. In the chapter titled “On the Evilness of Human Nature,” Hsun Tzu tries to prove that man is born with inherent desire for profit and sensual pleasure. But, despite these beginnings of evilness, he asserts that man at the same time possesses intelligence, and that his intelligence makes it possible for him to become good. In his own words: “Every man on the street has the capacity of knowing human-heartedness, righteousness, obedience to law and uprightness, and the means to carry out these principles. Thus it is evident that he can become a Yu.” … Thus whereas Mencius says that any man can become a Yao or Shun, because he is originally good, Hsun Tzu argues that any man can become a Yu, because he is originally intelligent. 17

  However, we should avoid making it appear that Hsun Tze is more pragmatic than Mencius. Both Mencius and Hsun Tze value virtue highly and make it the goal of education. We should also be aware that Hsun Tze has no intention of giving man over to the state or to an institution, subject to whatever ends they assign to him. Hsun Tze does not devalue or dehumanize man. Even though he asserts that human nature is basically wicked, he aims to educate and elevate man to a higher, if never quite perfect, level.

His general thesis is that everything that is good and valuable is the product of human effort. Value comes from culture and culture is the achievement of man. It is in this that man has the same importance in the universe as Heaven and Earth. 18

  Hsun Tze is unmistakably a Confucianist. While he tries to define Confucian theory in another light, he does not deny the ultimate goal of the Great Harmony, which carries on the spirit of Confucius. In fact, with a zeal no less great than that of Mencius, he sets forth to promote it.

As Hsun Tzu says: “Heaven has its seasons, Earth has its resources, man has his culture. This is what is meant [when it is said that man] is able to form a trinity [with Heaven and Earth].” (Hsun-tzu, ch. 17) 19

  Here we can see that despite the wide difference between their theories regarding human nature, the two Confucianists’ approaches to instilling virtue in people arrive at the same end: it can be done through education. Mencius’s emphasis on the goodness of human nature naturally better suits human pride. But in the practice of education, moral purification, even by chastisement if necessary, should be applied at all times. After all, who can tell whence comes the evil to be purified or corrected?

 

The Concept of Purification in Confucian Education

  After Confucius, Mencius is unquestionably the greatest philosopher of China. His effort in promoting the Confucian course, especially his theory of human nature, has been exceedingly important, and his influence is wide and long lasting. Yet, when it comes to the philosophy of education, Hsun Tze is on an equal footing with Mencius. In fact, his approach seems more systematic and coherent. The first chapter of his collected works is virtually a Confucian canon of education, a Summa Educatio. At the beginning he states:

The superior man says: Study should never stop. Green dye is taken from blue, but it is nearer the color of nature than blue. [or, Indigo comes from the color of blue, yet turned out darker than blue.  J.Y.] Ice comes from water, but is colder than water. If wood is straight, it conforms to the plumb line; steam it and bend it, and it can be used for a wheel, but its curvature must be in accord with the compass. Although it were dried in the sun it would not again become straight -- the bending made it that way. For wood must undergo the use of plumb-line to be straight; iron must be ground on the whetstone to be sharp; the superior man must make his learning broad and daily examine himself in order to have his knowledge exact and his actions without blemish. 20

  Through these analogies Hsun Tze is declaring that the purpose of education is to transform human nature: to bend it so as to fit either a norm or an ideal standard. This means that education has a twofold mission: academically, to provide a wide and acute knowledge; morally, to induce one to act properly -- “without blemish.”

  Homer H. Dubs rightly states that “Hsuntze has perhaps been popularly known for his philosophy of education.” 21 The book bearing his name begins with “An Encouragement to Study” (bk. I: Introduction). From beginning to end, the book demonstrates a remarkably comprehensive and systematic value. In his view, “Study from first to last is ethical in character, but it is in conformity to standard, not free self-development.” 22

  Here comes a notable difference between him and Mencius. To the latter, since human nature is good, to develop properly is to follow the nobler part of one’s nature, or “to nourish hao-jan-chih-ch’i ( 浩然之氣 ). 23 Then, goodness comes naturally just like water flowing downward. 24

  But Hsun Tze says that this is not so. He points out:

Mencius states that man is capable of learning because his nature is good, but I say that this is wrong. It indicates that he has not really understood man’s nature, nor distinguished properly between the basic nature and conscious activity. 25

  Since Hsun Tze considers human nature as basically evil, he maintains that if left to itself, it tends toward social evil, and hence will beget more evil. Yet he does not deny its potentiality for doing good as well. He admits that “this evil tendency does not prevent the development of goodness; every man has the capacity of rising to the height of the perfection of a Sage,” 26 Thus, Hsun Tze’s solution is to concentrate on suppressing evil energy in humans, and bend it toward good.

  If the works of Hsun Tze are considered as a curriculum of education and character formation, it is clear that to apply his instructions, one must emphasize ridding people of the wrong theories and practices, or virtually purifying them in order to develop the correct ones. In other words, to pull out the weeds so that the wheat can grow properly. This is particularly necessary in the areas of moral conduct, knowledge and politics. 27 Hence, Hsun Tze attacked the superstitious practice of physiognomy (bk. V) and the “twelve philosophers” (bk. VI) -- men little known to us today. He also promoted correcting erroneous theories (bk. XVIII), removing prejudices (bk. XXI), and rectifying terms (bk. XXII).

 

Language as a Vehicle for Morality

  Hsun Tze regards misconceptions as elements that becloud the mind, causing one to lose the path of learning itself, as well as the chance for ethical and political advancement. Hence his most remarkable proposal is probably his “Rectification of Terms” ( 正名篇 ). (Today we might call it “Semantics,” but this was its title in the original version, done before any known dictionary was published.)

  Actually, considering the impact of words is not a new task for education. Confucius mentions it in only one sentence. 28 However, other philosophers of Hsun Tze’s time also discussed this issue, though none dealt with it with Hsun Tze’s seriousness and thoroughness.

  Recognizing the link between language and thought, he sees the importance of communication in the human community. Not only is language a medium for communication, but it also can originate concepts. Hsun Tze says:

For when Kings had regulated names, when they had fixed terms and so distinguished realities, and when this principle (Tao) was carried out hence their will was everywhere known; they were careful to lead the people and so the people were unified. Therefore with distinguishing words and making unauthorized distinctions thus confusing the correct nomenclature, caused the people to be in doubt and bringing about much litigation which was called great wickedness. It was a crime like that of using false credentials or false measures. 29

  Thus, in Hsun Tze’s view, clearing up terms in language will help to purify people’s thinking. If people then understand the true meaning of words, they are more apt to act rightly. This noble and deep theory is akin to the thinking of modern linguists like Benjamin Lee Whorf and Ludwig (Josef Johann) Wittgenstein. They maintain that if we can redefine key terms through linguistic study and elucidate their true meanings, most, if not all, of the problems in religion and philosophy will be dissolved. Hsun Tze asserts this idea by quoting the ode:

The long night is endless;

My ever-flowing thoughts are nimble;

They do not disesteem the ancients;

 

They do not vary the rules of proper conduct (Li) and justice (Yi);

What care I for people’s talk? 30

  Hsun Tze acknowledges that words form thoughts and, ultimately, a value system. “The terms he uses and his speech are the messengers of his meaning.” 31 Therefore, when wayward words and thoughts are corrected, one will be able to distinguish between right and wrong, and have the moral courage to stand firm against universal darkness.

Furthermore, Hsun Tze says:

When the steelyard [scale, or balance] is not held properly, a heavy article will cause it to swing up high and people will think it is light; a light thing will cause the steelyard to hang down low, and people will think it is heavy. In this way people are misled about weights. When the standard [i.e., the iron bob of the steelyard] is not right, calamity is mixed with desire and people think it is happiness; or happiness mixed with hatred, and people think it is calamity. In this way, too, people are misled about calamity and happiness. 32

  Here, Hsun Tze makes clear the danger of words being used as devices for manipulating or deceiving people. Just as a seller in the marketplace who holds a scale improperly can cause buyers to get erroneous ideas about the weight of goods they wish to buy, people can get cheated by misleading words; or they may assign wrong values to them, misinterpret them, and act improperly.

  In today’s world, we too face this frustration. Changing word usages also changes their meanings as measures of moral standards. For example, adultery becomes “love affair” and fornication, “alternative life-style”; avarice is called “necessity,” indebtedness “credit,” and guilt “low self-esteem.” Thus by introducing new words or phrases we reduce negative connotations and moral judgments, or eliminate them entirely, making the conditions referred to as neutral, or more acceptable and even attractive -- blurring their exactness and moral significance.

  What should we do then? How should we then live? Hsun Tze goes on to offer a safeguard and some guidance: “The Way (Tao) is the correct standard in ancient times and in the present.” 33

  Tao, the Chinese word used here well known in the West, is often linked with the Greek word (and concept), Logos. This is more than mere coincidence. Both words can mean logic, and both are applied to ideas and to language and literature -- all of which can transmit and even transform the character of man. Therefore, Hsun Tze believes rectifying terms provides a crucial way to purify people’s thinking, guiding a person toward becoming the superior man proclaimed by Confucius. Such a person is “one who makes his personality important and makes material things [desire] his servant.” 34

  Hsun Tze, a man of words, frequently quotes The Canon of Odes throughout his book. The volume of his own work, too, contains a collection of poetry. Six of his own poems are included: “Propriety” (Li), “Wisdom” (Chih), “Clouds” (Yun), “Needle” (Chen), and “Silkworm” (Ts’an). 35 Even though only a fragment of his poetical writings, they are significant. Through allegories, Hsun Tze expresses his ideals, wishes, ambitions, and expectations for society -- hoping to influence his princely students and other readers.

  In the sixth poem, at the close of his book, he explicitly talks about “The Crisis of Our Age.” He paints a sorry picture of a culture lacking ethical decency; social disorder reigns in the midst of spiritual decline, when even the sun and moon are eclipsed. Those who study the Old Testament will be familiar with Isaiah’s description of a similar time, when people “called evil good and good evil, putting darkness for light and light for darkness, bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter,” 36 which condition shows an equally senseless state caused by manipulating words.

  Gazing at this mess of value-system abnormalities, Hsun Tze says pedagogically: “You lads do learning with diligence, / For Heaven will forget you not.” 37 With this exhortation, the Master shows his high hope on linguistic rectification as a chief way to purify one’s thinking and to advance in education.

 

The Teaching of Ethics

  Undeniably, Hsun Tze recognizes, one must consider the social effects of human aspirations and longings:

When desires are not satisfied, then one cannot be without a seeking for satisfaction. When this seeking for satisfaction is without measure or of limit, then there cannot but be contention. When there is contention, there will be disorder; when there is disorder, then there will be poverty. 38

  Hsun Tze’s work seems overly pedantic at times, even unnecessarily emphatic on “the rules of proper conduct” [Li, or Propriety]. Confucianists oppose the School of Legalism, which prescribes a ruthless use of law. They prefer to use Li (Rites) as a means for moral and social education. This code of conduct, Li, to Hsun Tze, has cardinal importance. He even attributes a cosmological principle to Li.

Li is that whereby Heaven and Earth unite, whereby the sun and moon are bright, whereby the four seasons are ordered, whereby the stars move in the courses. Whereby rivers flow, whereby all things prosper, whereby love and hatred are tempered, whereby joy and anger keep their proper place. It causes the lower orders to obey, and the upper orders to be illustrious; through a myriad changes it prevents going astray. But if one departs from it, he will be destroyed. Is not Li the greatest of all principles? 39

  Hsun Tze cannot overemphasize the importance of Li. Taking a prophetic and pragmatic tone resembling the passage in Proverbs in the Old Testament that admonishes wisdom, he says:

When the country follows it, there is good government and prosperity; when it is not followed there is anarchy and calamity. He who follows it is safe; he who does not follow it is in danger. He who follows it will be preserved; he who does not follow it will be destroyed. 40

  Today, this line of absolutist thinking is not readily accepted. But in a different context, most people in the Western world, as late as the Middle Ages, accepted and absorbed this kind of generalization. And certainly at any time in history, a person who loves law and order, and believes in absolute right and wrong, can readily make such a statement. Hsun Tze also links music (which for him included dance) to proper conduct. He regards music as an expression of emotion and a reflection of people’s living conditions. It is also useful as “group therapy,” attuning people to harmony and moving their hearts toward virtue: “From the way in which they move in groups and adapt themselves to the music, the arrangement of the rank is made correct, and their advancing and retreating are together.” 41 Furthermore –

In the Way (Tao) of the early Kings, the rules of proper conduct (Li) were exactly that in which they excelled….

Now sound and music enter deeply into people; their influence is rapid. For the early Kings carefully made it beautiful. When music is moderate and even, the people are harmonious and do not degenerate; when music is reverent and dignified, the people are tranquil and not in turmoil. When the people are harmonious and tranquil, the armies are strong, cities are secure, and enemy countries dare not attack. 42

  Hsun Tze, of course, is not the first Chinese philosopher to declare the importance of music. Confucius, before him, knew music very well. Commenting on Shao, a piece of music composed by Emperor Shun, he had declared that “It was perfectly beautiful and also perfectly good.” 43 This shows Confucius’s standard for the ideal of music, which Shun’s masterpiece attained. Regarding Confucius’s subjective appreciation of music, it is recorded that --

When the Master was in Ch’i, he heard the Shao, and for three months he did not know the taste of flesh [meats]. “I did not think,” he said, “that music could have been made so excellent as this!” 44

Though the music may not really have put Confucius on a special diet, this statement does demonstrate music’s powerful effect on the Master himself.

  In his time, Hsun Tze really seemed to know how to use the spirit of music in education:

Its indirect and direct appeals, its manifoldness and simplicity, its frugality and richness, its rests and notes, to stir up the goodness in men’s minds, and to prevent evil feelings from gaining any foothold. 45

  This passage shows Hsun Tze’s deep understanding of music, which even surpasses modern-day standards in degree and sophistication. He calls music “the greatest unifier in the world, the bond of inner harmony.” 46

  But not all music is good, in the sense that it induces proper conduct. Hsun Tze distinguishes good music from bad, in moralistic terms. He declares: “When music is pretty and fascinating, it is dangerous; then the people degenerate and are negligent, turmoil will begin; if they are mean and low, they will wrangle.” On the other hand, good music “can turn people’s hearts to goodness. Its influence is great; it changes people’s custom [from bad to good].” 47 People will then be peaceful and virtuous. This makes “the Way (Tao) of the Kings … very easy.” 48

  It may appear to those of us living today that both of the principal Confucianists presented here, Mencius and Hsun Tze, over-idealize the function of education in structuring individual and civic morality. Certainly history confirms that the Confucian theory of education did not deliver the dawn of “Great Harmony,” as it had promised. From our vantage point, then we may justify a skeptical attitude. However, our hindsight scarcely proves that we are any wiser than they on this side of the chasm, with some twenty centuries between the two eras. During this long period, human society has gone through enormous cultural changes.

  Meanwhile, the Chinese people, and China as a country as well, have held together for several millennia. Following Confucius, a rich, multifaceted culture developed, making undeniable contributions to humankind. This cohesion, strength, and durability in the Chinese way of life are in good part attributable to the Confucian learning system -- especially its moral philosophy. So surely there is great merit in it.

  It would seem, however, that Confucianism made China peculiarly vulnerable to the attractions of Communism’s political and social ideals, with a rigid legal system and perpetual purge and coercion. Most unfortunately, in their basic documents and important pronouncements no place can the word “moral” be found. Obviously, a moral life is too idealistic to fit within the parameters of the focus on materialism and the anti-religious stance that Communism notoriously promotes.

  At the same time, our present world, descending from the progression of Western civilization, is undeniably in a stage of distress and social disintegration. The sensate culture seems to be nearing its sunset. It is the right time now to re-evaluate the ancient wisdom of the Orient, especially its moral education that was passed from one generation to the next. And even more importantly, to examine it alongside the Occident’s major ethical force, both historically and currently -- Christianity.

  Albert Einstein, in “The Need for Ethical Culture,” said with almost a prophetic tone that --

The frightful dilemma of the political world situation has much to do with this sin of omission on the part of our civilization. Without “ethical culture,” there is no salvation for humanity. 49

  We have an urgent need for ethical values and resolve. Moral education enables people to transform themselves into ethical beings. It proceeds from the concept of purification -- cleansing away all that is impure or noxious. What can be done with the physical body as a health measure may also be done in a different way with the community, to introduce or restore moral responsibility and an ethical sensibility. Our society notably lacks both.

 

 

Notes for Chapter 1

 

1. Analects, V:12.

 

2. Analects, XVII:2.

 

3. Mortimer J. Adler, Ten Philosophical Mistakes. New York: Macmillan Publishing Co., 1987, p. 157.

 

4. A Source Book in Chinese Philosophy, trans. & comp., Wing-tsit Chan. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press. “Mencius 6A:3,” p. 52.

 

5. Chan, 6A:5, p. 53.

 

6. Chan, 6A:6, p.54.

 

7. Chan, 6A:10, p. 57.

 

8. Mencius, 2A:6.

 

9. Mencius, 6A:11.

 

10. Mencius, 6A:20.

 

11. Mencius, 6A:20.

 

12. “Acquired training,” T’ang Dynasty commentator Yang Ching noted that, from the Chinese character Wei, it could mean “action,” “effort,” or “artificial.”

 

13. Hsuntze, The Works of, trans. Homer H. Dubs. London: Arthur Probsthain, 1928, bk. XXIII, p. 301.

 

14. Hsuntze, XXIII, p. 307.

 

15. Hsuntze, XXIII.

 

16. Hsuntze, II, p. 47.

 

17. Fung Yu-lan, A Short History of Chinese Philosophy, ed. Derk Bodde. New York: The Free Press, 1948, p. 145.

 

18. Fung, p. 144.

 

19. Fung, p. 144.

 

20. Hsuntze, I, p. 31.

 

21. Homer H. Dubs, Hsuntze: The Moulder of Ancient Confucianism. London: Arthur Probsthain, 1927, p. 184.

 

22. Dubs, p. 195.

 

23. Mencius, 2A:2.

 

24. Mencius, 6A:2.

 

24. Basic Writings of Mo Tzu, Hsun Tzu, and Han Fei Tzu, trans. Burton Watson. New York: Columbia Univ. Press, 1954, p. 158.

 

26. Dubs, p. 184.

 

27. As I examine the contents of Hsun Tzu’s 32 chapters, I find it, generally speaking, can be categorized as following:

 

Introduction:

        I               An Encouragement to Study

Moral

        II              Self-cultivation

        III            On Integrity

        IV            On Honor & Shame

        VII           The Virtue of Confucians

        VIII          Confucianism in Application

        XXVIII    Principle of A Scholar

        XXIX       Filial Piety

        XXX        On Standard of Behaviors

        XXXI       On Several Kind of People

        XXXII     On the Effect of Personality Influence

Epistemological

        V             Against Physiognomy (anti-superstition)

        VI            Against the 12 Philosophies XVIII The Correction of Erroneous Theories

        XXI         The Removal of Prejudices

        XXII        On the Rectification of Terms (Linguistics)

Political

        IX            Kingly Government

        X             Wealth of State

        XI            Kings & Lords

        XII           The Prince

        XIII          The Officials

        XIV         To Obtain Worthies

        XV           On Military Affairs

        XVI         To Strengthen A State

        XXIV       The Sage King

        XXV        On Vicarship of the State

Practical

        XIX         On the Rules of Proper Conduct (Li)

        XX           On Music

Metaphysical

        XVII        Concerning Heaven (Nature)

        XXIII       The Nature of Man is Evil

Poetical

        XXVI       Poems (Express His Wish by Allegory)

L’envoi

        XXVII     Miscellanea

Note: The New Sung Version arranged the book in different order. The last, bk. XXXII, is “Poetical Writings.”

 

28. Analects, XII, iii.

 

29. Hsuntze, trans. Dubs, XII, p. 282.

 

30. Hsuntze, trans. Dubs, XXII, p. 292.

 

31. Hsuntze, XXII, p. 292.

 

32. Hsuntze, XXII, p. 297.

 

33. Hsuntze, XXII, p. 297.

 

34. Hsuntze, XXII, p.297.

 

35. Hsuntze, XXVI.

 

36. Isaiah, 5:20.

 

37. Hsuntze, XXV.

 

38. Hsuntze, trans. Dubs, XIX, p. 213.

 

39. Hsuntze, pp. 223-224.

 

40. Hsuntze, p. 234.

 

41. Hsuntze, XX, p. 249.

 

42. Hsuntze, XX, p. 250.

 

43. Analects, III:25, p. 164.

 

44. Analects, VII:13, p. 199; III:23; IX:14; XV:10; XVII:4.

 

45. Hsuntze, trans. Dubs, XX, p. 248.

Emperor Yao said, “K’wei, I appoint you to be Director of Music, and teach our sons; so that the straight forward will be with the mild, the magnanimous will be with the dignified, the tough will be without the tyrannical, and the simple will be without the arrogant.” (“Shun” in The Canon of Chronicles.)

 

46. Hsuntze, XX, p. 249.

 

47. Hsuntze, XX, p. 251.

 

48. Hsuntze, XX, p. 258.

 

49. Albert Einstein, “Letter read on the occasion of the seventy-fifth anniversary of the Ethical Culture Society, New York, January, 1951,” in Ideas and Opinions, trans. & rev. Sonja Bargmann. New York: Bonanza Books, 1954, pp. 53-54.