▪ ▪ ▪--15--▪ ▪ ▪
TAOISTIC CONFUCIANISM: YANG HSIUNG
Yang Hsiung (53 b.c.–a.d. 18) is usually given a position in the history of Chinese thought, though a minor one, because of his doctrine of human nature as a mixture of good and evil. The theory is asserted only in a sentence and is not elaborated upon or argued. Still it represents a real advance because it avoids the extremes of Mencius and Hsün Tzu (fl. 298–238 b.c.) and the arbitrary division into the two levels of nature and feelings by Tung Chung-shu (c. 179–c. 104 b.c.), and offers a significant alternative. It also underlines the fact that the problem of human nature remained a major one throughout the history of Chinese philosophy.
As to his metaphysics, by which he is identified with the term T’ai-hsüan (the Supremely Profound Principle or Great Mystery), he does no more than repeat Taoism, except that he combines it with Confucian ethics, in which his real interests lay. In this respect, he reflects the syncretic spirit of the Han period (206 b.c.–a.d. 220). At the same time, he exhibits a certain independent quality in refusing to accept the Confucian doctrine of the periodic appearance of sages, which was explicit in Mencius and implicit in Tung Chung-shu. He also rejects the popular belief in immortals. A man of extensive learning and high integrity, he endured poverty and led an undistinguished public life.1 The following selections are from his two books, the Fa-yen (Model Sayings) and the T’ai-hsüan ching (Classic of the Supremely Profound Principle).2
SELECTIONS
Man’s nature is a mixture of good and evil. He who cultivates the good in it will become a good man and he who cultivates the evil in it will become an evil man. The material force (ch’i) [with which one is endowed] is the driving force3 that leads one to good or evil. . . . Therefore the superior man studies hard and practices earnestly. He waits till his good becomes a rare treasure before he sells it. He cultivates his personal life before he makes friends. And he plans well before he acts. This is the way to fulfill the Way. . . . (Fa-yen, sppy, 3:l a-b)
Comment. According to Wang Ch’ung (27–100 a.d.?), the theory of the mixture of good and evil nature had been advanced long before Yung Hsiung.4 But Wang Ch’ung wrote long after Yang Hsiung. There can be no doubt that Yang’s theory was original. In any event, he has been considered the originator of the theory and has been severely criticized by Confucianists.
Someone asks, “Is it true that every five hundred years a sage will appear?”5
I reply, “Yao,6 Shun,7 and Yü8 were rulers and ministers, and they came one after another. (Sages) King Wen,9 King Wu,10 and the Duke of Chou11 were father and sons, and they lived at the same time. King T’ang12 and Confucius lived several hundred years [after the previous sage]. Inferring the future on the basis of the past, we do not know whether one sage will appear in a thousand years or a thousand sages will appear in one year.”13 (sppy, 8:1a)
Someone asks, “Don’t the dragon, the tortoise, and the wild swan live very long?”
I say, “They live very long.”
“Can man live very long?”
“Creatures live long because of their nature. Man does so because of his humanity (jen).” . . .
Someone asks, “If there are no immortals in the world, why do people talk about them?”
I reply, “Isn’t all this talk hubbub? Because it is hubbub, it can make what is nonexistent seem to exist.”
Someone then asks about the actual truth about immortals.
I say, “I shall have nothing to do with the question. Their existence or nonexistence is not something to talk about. What should be asked are questions on loyalty and filial piety.” (sppy, 12:4b-5a)
Comment: A typical Confucian attitude toward life after death. The belief in immortals was being promoted by a religious cult worshipping the legendary Yellow Emperor of high antiquity and Lao Tzu. But to seek to live forever is contrary to the Taoist philosophy of indifference to life and death and to letting things take their own course. Therefore the belief had no place in Taoist philosophy but only in a popular cult which later assumed the name of Taoist religion.
The Supremely Profound Principle deeply permeates all species of things but its physical form cannot be seen. It takes nourishment from vacuity (hsü) and nothingness (wu) and derives its life from Nature.14 It correlates matters of spiritual intelligence and determines the natural course of events. It penetrates the past and present and originates the various species. It operates yin and yang (passive and active cosmic forces) and starts the material force in motion. As yin and yang unite, all things are complete in heaven and earth. The sky and the sun rotate and the weak and the strong interact. They return to their original positions and thus the beginning and end are determined. Life and death succeed each other and thus the nature and destiny are made clear. Looking up, we see the forms of the heavens. Looking down, we see the condition of the earth. We examine our nature and understand our destiny. We trace our beginning and see our end. . . . Therefore the Profound Principle is the perfection of utility. To see and understand is wisdom. To look and love is humanity. To determine and decide is courage. To control things universally and to use them for all is impartiality. To be able to match all things is penetration. To have or not to have the proper circumstance is destiny. The way by which all things emerge from vacuity is the Way. To follow the principles of the world without altering them and to attain one’s end is virtue. To attend to life, to be in society, and to love universally is humanity. To follow order and to evaluate what is proper is righteousness. To get hold of the Way, virtue, humanity, and righteousness and put them into application is called the business of life. To make clear the achievement of Nature and throw light on all things is called yang. To be hidden, without form, deep and unfathomable is called yin. Yang knows yang but does not know yin. Yin knows yin but does not know yang. The Profound Principle alone knows both yin and yang, both going and stopping, and both darkness and light. . . . (T’ai-hsüan ching, ch. 9, sptk, 7:5a-9b)
▪ ▪ ▪--16--▪ ▪ ▪
THE NATURALISM OF WANG CH’UNG
Considerable interest in Wang Ch’ung (27-100?) has been aroused in the last several decades. In our age of critical spirit, skepticism, scientific method, demand for evidence, and revolt against the past, this is perfectly natural, for Wang Ch’ung represents all these. A thoroughly independent thinker, he was not identified with any school and has often been classified as a member of the Miscellaneous School. In his metaphysics, he is definitely Taoistic, somewhat modified by the idea of the interfusion and intermingling of the yin and yang forces in the Book of Changes. But even here he is different, for while Taoism is very much interested in metaphysics but not much in human institutions, Wang took the opposite position. Actually he is neither creative nor significant so far as metaphysics is concerned. His chief contribution to the history of Chinese thought is to clear the atmosphere of superstition and enhance the critical and rational spirit that was already incipient.
When Wang was born, Confucianism had been the supreme doctrine in China for more than a hundred years. Influenced by popular priest-magicians who spread superstitions and performed miracles, the essentially rationalistic Confucian doctrine of the unity of man and Nature had degenerated into one of mutual influence, often of a mysterious kind. Furthermore, in an attempt to make Confucius more than the supreme sage, efforts were made to deify him, and he was considered the “uncrowned king” appointed by Heaven. The beginning of this tendency was already evident in Tung Chung-shu (c.179–c.104 b.c.). During the Western Han period (206 b.c.–a.d. 8) a whole body of apocryphal literature grew up to supplement the basically humanistic and rationalistic Confucian Classics, a literature with fantastic interpretation of the Classics in order to support the belief in portents and prophecies. The influence of this literature was particularly strong between the Western Han and the Eastern Han (25-220). It was very popular during the reign of Emperor Wu (r. 140–87 b.c.), and Wang Mang, ruler of Hsin dynasty (9-23), loved it excee
dingly. The intellectual situation at Wang Ch’ung’s time was therefore something like this: (1) Confucianism was supreme; (2) it was being debased into a mysterious and superstitious doctrine; (3) the unity of man and Nature was turned into one of mutual influence; (4) these influences were thought to be exerted through strange phenomena and calamities; (5) Heaven, though not anthropomorphic, was purposive, asserting its will through prodigies as warning to men; and (6), on a smaller scale spiritual beings exercised similar influence.
Wang Ch’ung rose in revolt against all these prevalent beliefs. In clear, critical, and strong terms, he declared that Heaven takes no action, that natural events, including prodigies, occur spontaneously, that there is no such thing as teleology, that fortune and misfortune come by chance, and that man does not become a ghost at death. In addition, he insisted that any theory must be tested by concrete evidence, and he himself argued in a strictly rational manner supporting his theories with one fact after another. For him, the past is no sure guidance, for there is no fact to prove that the past is better than the present. Thus in one stroke he rejected the total body of beliefs and dogma accumulated over several centuries. In doing so, he raised the pitch of skepticism and naturalism to a height never before reached in Chinese history. In this way he prepared for the growth of rationalism and naturalism in the Wei-Chin period (220-420) which probably would not have come about without him. Wang’s contribution, then, does not lie in any original thought but in the fostering of a new spirit.
Wang grew up in a very poor family and had to read books in a bookstore. He was a quiet scholar and devoted teacher, and was known as one of three geniuses in his time.1 The following selections are from his extant work, the Lun-heng (Balanced Inquiries).
THE BALANCED INQUIRIES2
A. On Original Nature (ch. 13)
Man’s feelings and nature are the root of government by men and the source of ceremonies and music. Therefore as we investigate the matter, we find that ceremonies are employed to check the excess of the nature and feelings and music is used to regulate them. In man’s nature there are the qualities of humbleness, modesty, deference, and compliance. Hence ceremonies have been instituted to adjust them to their proper expression. In men’s feelings there are the qualities of like and dislike, pleasure and anger, and sorrow and joy. Hence music has been created to enable their feeling of reverence to be expressed everywhere. Nature and feelings are therefore the reason why systems of ceremonies and music have been created. Scholars in the past have written essays and treatises to discuss the subjects but none of them was final or correct.
Shih Shih3 of the Chou (1111–249 b.c.) maintained that in nature some are born good and some are born evil. Take the good nature and cultivate it, and goodness will develop. Take the evil nature and cultivate it, and evil will develop. Thus in nature some belong to yin (passive cosmic force) and some belong to yang (active cosmic force), and some are good and some are evil. It all depends on cultivation. Therefore Master Shih wrote the “Book on Cultivating [Nature].”4 People like Mi Tzu-chien, Ch’i Tiao-k’ai, and Kung-sun Ni-tzu5 also discussed the subjects of man’s feelings and nature. They varied from Master Shih somewhat, and all said that in nature some are good and some are evil. Mencius wrote an essay on the goodness of human nature and thought that the nature of all men is originally good and that if they are evil, it is because material circumstances upset them.6. . . According to Mencius, all people are good in childhood. . . . When (wicked king) Chou7 was a child, the viscount of Wei saw the evil nature in him. His evil nature was no worse than that of the ordinary people, but as he grew up, he did violence to it instead of transforming it. . . . What Mencius said about the feelings and nature is not true. . . . Kao Tzu was a contemporary of Mencius. In his discussion on human nature, he said that it is neither good nor evil. . . .8 When Kao Tzu used the analogy of breaching water [to the east or west as nature can be made good or evil], he was referring to average people but not to those extremely good or extremely evil. Confucius said, “By nature men are alike. Through practice they have become far apart.”9. . . And also, “Only the most intelligent and the most stupid do not change.”10 Nature in some is good and in some is evil, and can no longer be changed by the influence of sages or the teachings of worthies. . . . Therefore I know that what Kao Tzu said is not true.
Hsün Tzu (fl. 298–238 b.c.) opposed Mencius and wrote “The Nature of Man Is Evil.”11. . . According to his words, men are not good in childhood. But when Chi (worthy minister of sage-emperor Yao,12 who taught people agriculture) was a boy he played planting trees, and as soon as Confucius could walk, he performed sacrificial rites for fun.13 A stone is hard as soon as it is produced, and an orchid is fragrant as soon as it comes into being. . . . What Hsün Tzu said is not true. . . .
Tung Chung-shu read the works of Mencius and Hsün Tzu and originated the theory of human nature and feelings saying, “. . . nature is born of yang and feelings are born of yin. The force of yin results in greed and that of yang results in humanity. Those who say that nature is good have insight about yang and those who say that nature is evil have insight about yin.”14 What Tung Chung-shu means is that Mencius had insight about yang and Hsün Tzu had insight about yin. So far as he asserts that each of them had his own insight, he is correct. But his theory does not settle the matter of the nature and the feelings. It is not true that the nature and the feelings of all men are both good and evil. For both man’s nature and his feelings are products of yin and yang. Being products of yin and yang, some are rich and some are poor. Jades are products of stone. Some are pure and some are impure. How can nature and feelings, being [products of] yin and yang, be purely good? What Tung Chung-shu said is not true.
Liu Tzu-cheng (77–6 b.c.) said, “Man’s nature is inborn. It is in man and is not expressed. His feelings, on the other hand, are what come into contact with things. They are revealed externally. What is revealed externally is called yang and what is not expressed is called yin.”15. . . According to his words, nature is yin (evil) and feelings are yang (good). But don’t man’s endowed feelings, after all, have both good and evil elements?. . .
The truth is that in nature, some people are born good and some born evil. It is just as some people’s capacity is high and some people’s is low. High capacity cannot be made low and low capacity cannot be made high. To say that human nature is neither good nor evil is like saying that man’s capacity is neither high nor low. . . . At bottom I consider Mencius’ doctrine of the goodness of human nature as referring to people above the average, Hsün Tzu’s doctrine of evil nature of man as referring to people below the average, and Yang Hsiung’s (53 b.c–a.d. 18) doctrine that human nature is a mixture of good and evil16 as referring to average people. Insofar as their doctrines return to moral principles and accord with truth, they may be used to teach people. As to principles of nature, however, they have not been able to investigate them to the utmost, (sppy, 3:12a-16a)
Comment. Wang Chung sums up practically all previous theories on human nature: (1) that some people are born good and some are born evil (Shih Shih);17 (2) that man is born good (Mencius); (3) that man is originally neither good nor evil (Kao Tzu); (4) that man is born evil (Hsün Tzu); (5) that man has the beginning of goodness and his nature is good but his feelings are evil (Tung Chung-shu); (6) that man’s nature is evil but his feelings are good (Liu Hsiang); and (7) that man’s nature is a mixture of good and evil (Yang Hsiung). He also criticized Lu Chia (216-176 b.c.), but Lu merely repeated Mencius except that instead of fully developing one’s nature as Mencius had urged, he advocated “examining one’s nature.” Actually he did not represent any new theory.
Wang’s own theory is new but it is not a real advance, for the presence of either good or evil is not explained. In accepting Yang Hsiung’s theory of mixture as referring to average people, he seems to believe in three grades of human nature. This would have anticipated Hsün Yüeh (148-209).18 However, his main thesis is dualism. Inasmuch as th
e entire Western Han period is characterized by a dualistic approach to human nature, in terms of good nature and evil feelings, Wang’s own dualism, in terms of good and evil natures, shows little progress.
B. On Spontaneity (ch. 54)
When the material forces (ch’i)19 of Heaven and Earth come together, all things are spontaneously produced, just as when the vital forces (ch’i) of husband and wife unite, children are naturally born. Among the things thus produced, blood creatures are conscious of hunger and cold. Seeing that the five grains are edible, they obtain and eat them. And seeing that silk and hemp can be worn, they obtain and wear them. Some say that Heaven produces the five grains in order to feed man and produces silk and hemp in order to clothe man. This is to say that Heaven becomes a farmer or a mulberry girl for the sake of man. This is contrary to spontaneity. Therefore their ideas are suspect and should not be followed.
A Source Book in Chinese Philosophy Page 36
