Likewise, the time element has an unusual bearing on his doctrine of history. He views history as going in a cycle of three periods, symbolized by black, white, and red. This in itself is not much different from Tsou Yen’s (305–240 b.c.?) theory of the revolution of the Five Powers.1 What is unique is that the correct period must begin at the right time.
In this scheme of things, the supreme position belongs to the king. When imperial power was fast growing in the Han (206 b.c.–a.d. 220), this is not surprising. People, born with greed as well as with humanity, are considered to be unenlightened by nature, and require a king to instruct them. Applied to human relations, this becomes Tung’s Three Bonds according to which the ruler, the father, and the husband are to be the standards of the ruled, the son, and the wife. Some scholars have maintained that it was precisely because of this authoritarianism that the Han rulers welcomed Confucianism as the state ideology. Be that as it may, it must be pointed out that in Tung’s system there are factors that would check the ruler. After all, he can rule only if he receives the mandate from Heaven, and the will of Heaven is to be discovered not by an astrologer to whom the king might dictate but through portents, which are expressions of the natural cosmic forces of yin and yang. In the final analysis it was Confucius, according to Tung, who understood the origin of things, of which portents as well as human and natural events are manifestations, and who taught humanity (jen) and righteousness rooted in Heaven. Thus the final power of interpreting what is correct or not rests with Confucian scholars. Hu Shih (1891-1962) has suggested that Tung was probably the first man to make an appeal to the Law of God in his attack on the nobles and officials of the empire.2
Tung was a professor of the national university, a very high honor, as well as twice a chief minister. He was the greatest Confucianist of his time, and for several hundred years afterward. Once he studied and taught so hard that for three years he did not see his garden.3 The following are selections, including four full chapters, from his work the Ch’un-ch’iu fan-lu (Luxuriant Gems of the “Spring and Autumn Annals”)
LUXURIANT GEMS OF THE SPRING AND AUTUMN ANNALS4
A. The Profound Examination of Names and Appellations (ch. 35)
. . . . The present generation is ignorant about human nature. Speakers on the subject differ from each other. Why not try to go back to the term “nature” (hsing)? Does not the term “nature” mean what is inborn (sheng)?5 If it means what is inborn, then the basic substance naturally endowed is called man’s nature. Nature is the basic substance. If we inquire into the basic substance of nature by applying the term “good,” will that be correct? If not, why still say that the basic substance is good? The term “nature” cannot be separated from the basic substance. When it is separated from the basic substance, as in the case of hair, it will no longer be nature. This should be clearly understood. The Spring and Autumn Annals examines the principles of things and rectifies their names. It applies names to things as they really are, without making the slightest mistake. Therefore in mentioning [the strange event of] falling meteorites, it mentions the number five afterward [because the meteorites were seen first and their number discovered later], whereas in mentioning the [ominous event of] fishhawks flying backward, it mentions the number six first [because six birds were first seen flying away and upon a closer look it was then found that they were fishhawks].6 Such is the care of the Sage (Confucius, its author) to rectify names. [As he himself said], “With regard to his speech, the superior man does not take it lightly.”7 His statements about the five meteorites and the six fishhawks are good illustrations of this.
It is the mind that keeps the various evil things weak within so that they cannot be expressed outside. Therefore the mind (hsin) is called the weak (jen).8 If in the endowment of material force (ch’i) one is free from evil, why should the mind keep anything weak? From the name of the mind I know the real character of man. In his real character man has both humanity (jen)9 and greed. The material forces responsible for both humanity and greed are found in his person. What is called the person is received from Heaven (T’ien, Nature). Heaven has its dual operation of yin and yang (passive and active cosmic forces), and the person also has his dual nature of humanity and greed. There are cases when Heaven restricts the operation of yin and yang, and there are cases when the person weakens his feelings and desires. [The way of man] and the Way of Heaven are the same. Consequently as yin functions, it cannot interfere with spring or summer (which correspond to yang), and the full moon is always overwhelmed by sunlight, so that at one moment it is full and at another it is not. This is the way Heaven restricts the operation of yin. How can [man] not reduce his desires and stop his feelings (both corresponding to yin) in order to respond to Heaven? As the person restricts what Heaven restricts, it is therefore said that the person is similar to Heaven. To restrict what Heaven restricts is not to restrict Heaven itself. We must know that without training our nature endowed by Heaven cannot in the final analysis make [the feelings and desires] weak. If we examine actuality to give names, when there has been no training, on what ground can nature be so called (as good)?
Comment. It is absurd to draw conclusions on human nature from similarity in pronunciation of words. The question of human nature, however, is a serious one, for it was a central problem during the entire history of Confucianism, and with Tung it enters upon a new stage. In saying that nature means what is inborn, he seems to be repeating Kao Tzu (c.420–c.350 b.c.), and in asserting the dual nature of humanity and greed, he seems to be suggesting the theory that human nature is a mixture of good and evil. Actually neither is true. The theory of mixed nature did not develop until Yang Hsuing (53 b.c.–a.d. 18).10 Tung’s own theory is unique: there is goodness in human nature, but it is only the beginning of goodness and it requires training to be realized. His whole emphasis is on education.
Therefore man’s nature may be compared to the rice stalks and goodness to rice. Rice comes out of the rice stalk but not all the stalk becomes rice. Similarly, goodness comes out of nature but not all nature becomes good. Both goodness and rice are results of human activity in continuing and completing the creative work of Heaven, which is outside of Heaven’s own operation, and are not inherent in what Heaven has produced, which is within its operation. The activity of Heaven extends to a certain point and then stops. What stops within the operation of Heaven is called human nature endowed by Heaven, and what stops outside the operation of Heaven is called human activity. Man’s activity lies outside of his nature, and yet it is inevitable that [through training] his nature will become virtuous. The term “people” (min) is derived from the term “sleep” (ming, ignorant, literally, closing one’s eyes).11 If nature is already good [at birth], why are people so called? Take the case of meteorites. If they were not supported in place, they would be rolling wild. How can they be good?
Man’s nature may be compared to the eyes. In sleep they are shut and there is darkness. They must await the awakening before they can see. Before the awakening it may be said that they possess the basic substance (quality) to see, but it cannot be said that they see. Now the nature of all people possesses this basic substance but it is not yet awakened; it is like people in sleep waiting to be awakened. It has to be trained before it becomes good. Before it is awakened, it may be said to possess the basic substance to become good but it cannot be said that it is already good. It is the same as the case of the eyes being shut and becoming awakened. If we leisurely examine this matter with a calm mind, the truth becomes evident. Man’s nature being in sleep, as it were, and before awakening is the state created by Heaven (Nature). To follow what Heaven has done and give it a name, we call the creatures “people” (min). By that is meant that they are in sleep (ming). If we inquire into principles according to their names and appellations, we shall understand. Thus names and appellations are to be rectified in accordance with [the principles] of Heaven and Earth. Nature and feelings are produced by Heaven and Earth. Both nature a
nd feelings are the same in a state of sleep. Feelings are [part of] nature. If we say that nature is already good, what can we say about feelings [which are sources of evil]? Therefore the Sage never said that nature is good, for to say so would be to violate the correctness of the name.
That the person possesses nature and feelings is similar to the fact that Heaven has yin and yang. To say that there is no feeling in man’s basic substance is like saying that there is yang in Heaven but no yin. Such absurd ideas are never acceptable.12 What we call nature does not refer to the highest type of man nor to the lowest, but to the average. The nature of man is like a silk cocoon or an egg. An egg has to be hatched to become a chicken, and a silk cocoon has to be unravelled to make silk. It is the true character of Heaven that nature needs to be trained before becoming good. Since Heaven has produced the nature of man which has the basic substance for good but which is unable to be good [by itself], therefore it sets up the king to make it good. This is the will of Heaven. The people receive from Heaven a nature which cannot be good [by itself], and they turn to the king to receive the training which completes their nature. It is the duty of the king to obey the will of Heaven and to complete the nature of the people.
Comment. Tung’s idea of three types of man seems to anticipate the theory of three grades of human nature which originated with Hsün Yüeh (148-209).13 That theory was a prevalent one during the whole Eastern Han period (25-220). During the Western Han (206 b.c.–a.d. 8), however, the prevalent theory was that human nature is good whereas feelings are evil, and Tung was the one who initiated it. To him, everyone has the beginning of goodness in his nature, which also involves evil. The highest type not only has the beginning but almost goodness in its activity, and the lowest type has almost no beginning at all. Nevertheless, nature as an equivalent to yang is good, whereas feelings as equivalent to yin are evil. Thus humanity belongs to nature, and greed belongs to feelings. But since feelings are included in nature, it is correct to say that greed also belongs to nature. Tung tries to resolve the conflict between nature and feelings through education. However, philosophically it was not resolved until Neo-Confucianism.
Now to claim on the basis of the true character of the basic substance of man that man’s nature is already good [at birth] is to lose sight of the will of Heaven and to forgo the duty of the king. If the nature of all people were already good, then what duty is there for the king to fulfill when he receives the mandate from Heaven? To give an incorrect name and as a consequence to abandon one’s solemn duty and to violate the great Mandate of Heaven is not to use any word in an exemplary way. In using terms the Spring and Autumn Annals approaches from the external aspect of a thing if its internal aspect depends on the external aspect [for its full meaning]. Now the nature of all people depends on training, which is external, before it becomes good. Therefore goodness has to do with training and not with nature. If it had to do with nature, it would be much involved and lack refinement, and everyone would become perfect by himself and there would be no such people as worthies and sages. This is an erroneous doctrine of highly respected people of our time but not the way in which terms are used in the Spring and Autumn Annals. Unexemplary words and unfounded doctrines are avoided by the superior man. Why utter them?
Someone says, “Since nature contains the beginning of goodness and since the mind possesses the basic substance of goodness, how can nature still not be regarded as good?”
I reply, “You are wrong. The silk cocoon contains [potential] silk but it is not yet silk, and the egg contains the [potential] chicken but it is not yet a chicken. If we follow these analogies, what doubt can there be? Heaven has produced mankind in accordance with its great14 principle, and those who talk about nature should not differ from each other. But there are some who say that nature is good and others who say that nature is not good. Then what is meant by goodness differs with their various ideas. There is the beginning of goodness in human nature. Let us activate it and love our parents. And since man is better than animals, this may be called good—this is what Mencius meant by goodness.15 Follow the Three Bonds16 and the Five Relationships.17 Comprehend the principles of the Eight Beginnings.18 Practice loyalty and faithfulness and love all people universally. And be earnest and deep and love propriety.19 One may then be called good—this is what the Sage meant by goodness.”
Comment. Although the Confucian five human relations are established on the basis of mutual moral obligation, at the same time the thought was inherent in the Confucian system that the ruler, the father, and the husband are superior to the ruled, the son, and the wife. This distinction is strengthened by Tung Chung-shu, for by “bond” is meant not merely a relationship but a standard. Ever since Han times, in the Confucian ethic, the ruler has become the “standard” of the ruled, and so forth. In view of the fact that to him yang is superior to yin, it is logical to say that the ruler, who corresponds to yang, is superior to the ruled. The same is true of the other relations. Thus the double standard is put on a natural basis.
Therefore Confucius said, “A good man it is not mine to see. If I could see a man of constant virtue, I would be content.”20 From this we know that what the Sage called goodness is not easy to match. It is not simply because we are better than animals that we may be called good. If merely activating the beginning and being better than animals may be called goodness, why is it not evident [from the beginning]? That being better than animals is not sufficient to be called goodness is the same as being wiser than plants is not sufficient to be called wisdom. The nature of people is better than that of animals but may not be regarded as good. The term knowledge (wisdom) is derived from the word sageliness. What the Sage ordered is accepted by the world as correct. To correct the course of day and night depends on the polar star, and to correct suspicions and doubts depends on the Sage. From the point of view of the Sage, the generation without a king and people without training cannot be equal to goodness. Such is the difficulty to match goodness. It is too much to say that the nature of all people can be equal to it. If evaluated in comparison with the nature of animals, the nature of man is of course good. But if evaluated in comparison with the goodness according to the way of man [as it should be], man’s nature falls short. It is all right to say that human nature is better than that of animals, but it is not all right to say that their nature is what the Sage calls goodness. My evaluation of life and nature differs from that of Mencius. Mencius evaluated on the lower level the behavior of animals and therefore said that man’s nature is good [at birth], I evaluate on the higher level what the Sage considers to be goodness, and therefore say that man’s nature is not good to start with. Goodness is higher than human nature, and the sage is higher than goodness. The Spring and Autumn Annals is concerned with the great origin. Therefore it is very careful in the rectification of names. If a name does not come from its proper origin, how can we talk about nature not being good or already being good?” (sptk, 10:3b-7a)
Comment. Tung Chung-shu actually departs from Confucius and Mencius in the matter of education. Early Confucianists emphasized self-education, although teachers and rulers are helpful and even necessary. But Tung insists that people by nature and by their very name are in the dark (in sleep) and cannot be good without instructions from the ruler. Then he offers human nature as a justification for authoritarianism. In this he goes even further than Hsün Tzu (fl. 298–238 b.c.)·
B. The Meaning of the Five Agents (ch. 42)
Heaven has Five Agents (i.e. Elements): the first is Wood; the second, Fire; the third, Earth; the fourth, Metal; and the fifth, Water. Wood is the beginning of the cycle of the Five Agents, Water is its end, and Earth is its center. Such is their natural sequence. Wood produces Fire, Fire produces Earth, Earth produces Metal, Metal produces Water, and Water produces Wood. Such is their father-and-son relationship. Wood occupies the left, Metal occupies the right, Fire occupies the front, Water occupies the rear, and Earth occupies the center. Such is their order as th
at of father and son, and the way in which they receive from each other and spread out. Therefore Wood received from Water, Fire from Wood, Earth from Fire, Metal from Earth, and Water from Metal. Those that give are fathers and those that receive are sons. It is the Way of Heaven that the son always serves his father. Therefore when Wood is produced, Fire should nourish it, and after Metal perishes, Water should store it. Fire enjoys Wood and nourishes it with yang, but Water overcomes Metal and buries it with yin. Earth serves Heaven with the utmost loyalty. Therefore the Five Agents are the actions of filial sons and loyal ministers. The Five agents are so called because they are tantamount to five actions. That is how the term was derived. The sage knows this and therefore he shows much love and little sternness, and is generous in supporting the living and serious in burying the dead. This is to follow the system of Heaven. It is the function of the son to receive and to fulfill. For him to support is like Fire enjoying Wood, to bury one’s father is like Water overcoming Metal, and serving the ruler is like Earth showing respect to Heaven. People like these may be said to be good in their actions.
Comment. Unlike the Yin Yang School which puts the Five Agents on the same level or in a cycle, Tung arranges them lineally. He did so partly because of his strong emphasis on the idea of the origin which means that things proceed in time on a straight-line sequence, and partly because of his strong feeling for hierarchy. It is no wonder that loyalty and filial piety are on the forefront, for that is where the ruler and the father are to be found.
A Source Book in Chinese Philosophy Page 34
