52. “Nature is the same as principle.” If you regard it as the source of the ten thousand principles, it would seem to be a different thing. Master K’ang-chieh (Shao Yung) said, “Man’s nature is the concrete embodiment of the Way.” His statement seems to the point. He also said, “Although the nature remains tranquil, but if we do not know how to preserve it, it will not attain the mean.”113 Now, the nature should necessarily attain the Mean, just as water should necessarily be cold and fire be hot. But the Mean is sometimes not attained because man loses his original nature and beclouds it by habits engendered by material force. It is not that nature fails to attain the Mean. (42:21b)
53. “Nature is the concrete embodiment of the Way” is a sentence in (Shao Yung’s) preface to his Chi-jang ko (Striking Earthen Musical Instruments; A Collection of Poems). Its meaning is that nature is the concrete substance of what man receives from Heaven while the Way is the principle by which things are as they are. The principle of things is, of course, inherent in their nature, but when it is spoken of as the Way, it means something indefinite, boundless, and different in infinite variety, where concreteness is not to be seen. Only when we look into nature—and nowhere else—do we find the Way in its concreteness. When the Doctrine of the Mean says “To follow human nature is called the Way,”114 it means this. (42:21b-22a)
54. “Nature is the concrete embodiment of the Way.” When it is spoken of as the Way, it means something to spread over all things, with no clue for us to find it. But if we look for it in the mind, we shall find that all the principles inherent in it have definite substance and are unchangeable. These principles inherent in the mind are what we call nature. Therefore Master Shao goes on to say, “The mind is the endowment of nature.” If you examine the matter in this way, the truth or error of what you (Fang Pin-wang) say can readily be seen. (42:22a)
4. The Nature of Man and the Nature of Things Compared
55. Question: Do all the Five Agents (Metal, Wood, Water, Fire, and Earth) possess the Great Ultimate?
Answer: They all do.
Question: Does man embody all the Five Agents while things embody only one of them?
Answer: Things also embody all the Five Agents, except that they embody them partially. (42:25a)
56. Question: Man and things are all endowed with the principle of the universe as their nature, and receive the material force of the universe as their physical form. The difference in personality is of course due to the various degrees of purity and strength of the material force. But in the case of things, are they as they are because of the incompleteness of the principle with which they are endowed or because of the impurity and beclouding character of the material force endowed in them?
Answer: The principle received by things is precisely in the same degree as the material force received by them. For example, the physical constitution of dogs and horses being what it is, they know how to do only certain things.
Further question: If each individual thing possesses its own Great Ultimate in its completeness, then principle can never be incomplete. [In this case, how is it that things possess principle only to a limited degree?]
Answer: You may consider it complete or you may consider it partial. From the point of view of principle, it is always complete, but from the point of view of material force, it cannot help being partial. This is why Lü Ta-lin (Lü Yü-shu, 1044-1090) said that in certain cases the nature of things approximates to the nature of man and in some cases the nature of man approximates that of things.115 (42:26b-27a)
57. Question: Physical nature differs in the degree of purity. Does the nature bestowed by Heaven differ in the degree of its completeness?
Answer: No, there is no difference in the degree of its completeness. It is like the light of the sun and moon. In a clear, open field, it is seen in its entirety. Under a mat-shed, however, some of it is hidden and obstructed so that part of it is visible and part of it is not. What is impure is due to the impurity of material force. The obstruction is due to the self, like the mat-shed obstructing itself. However, man possesses the principle that can penetrate this obstruction, whereas in birds and animals, though they also possess this nature, it is neverthless restricted by their physical structure, which creates such a degree of obstruction as to be impenetrable. In the case of love, for example, in tigers and wolves, or in the sacrificial rites in the wolf and otter,116 or in the righteousness in bees and ants, only the obstruction to a particular part of their nature is penetrated, just as light penetrates only a crack. As to the monkey, whose bodily form resembles that of man, it is the most intelligent among other creatures except that it cannot talk. (42:27a-b)
58. Chi117 submitted to the Teacher the following statement concerning a problem in which he was still in doubt: The nature of man and the nature of things are in some respects the same and in other respects different. Only after we know wherein they are similar and wherein they are different can we discuss nature. Now, as the Great Ultimate begins its activity, the two material forces (yin and yang, passive and active cosmic forces) assume physical form, and as they assume physical form, the myriad transformations of things are produced. Both man and things have their origin here. This is where they are similar. But the two material forces and the Five Agents, in their fusion and intermingling, and in their interaction and mutual influence, produce innumerable changes and inequalities. This is where they are different. They are similar in regard to principle, but different in respect to material force. There must be principle before there can be that which constitutes the nature of man and things. Consequently, what makes them similar cannot make them different. There must be material force before there can be that which constitutes their physical form. Consequently, what makes them different cannot make them similar. For this reason, in your Ta-hsüeh huo-wen (Questions and Answers on the Great Learning), you said, “From the point of view of principle, all things have one source, and of course man and things cannot be distinguished as higher and lower creatures. From the point of view of material force, that which receives it in its perfection and is unimpeded becomes man, while those that receive it partially and are obstructed become things. Because of this, they cannot be equal, but some are higher and others are lower.”118 However, while in respect to material force they are unequal, they both possess it as the stuff of life, and while in respect to principle they are similar, in receiving it to constitute his nature, man alone differs from other things. This consciousness and movement proceed from material force while humanity, righteousness, propriety, and wisdom proceed from principle. Both man and things are capable of consciousness and movement, but though things possess humanity, righteousness, propriety, and wisdom, they cannot have them completely. Now Kao Tzu (c.420–c.350 b.c.) pointed to material force and neglected principle. He was confined to what is similar and ignorant of what is different, and was therefore attacked by Mencius.119 In your [Meng Tzu] chi-chu (Collected Commentaries on the Book of Mencius) you maintain that “in respect to material force, man and things do not seem to differ in consciousness and movement, but in respect to principle, the endowment of humanity, righteousness, propriety, and wisdom are necessarily imperfect in things.”120 Here you say that man and things are similar in respect to material force but different in respect to principle, in order to show that man is higher and cannot be equaled by things. In the Ta-hsüeh huo-wen, you say that man and things are similar in respect to principle but different in respect to material force, in order to show that the Great Ultimate is not deficient in anything and cannot be interfered with by any individual. Looked at this way, there should not be any question. When someone was puzzled by the discrepancies in the Ta-hsüeh huo-wen and the chi-chu, I explained it in this way. Is this correct?
The Teacher commented: On this subject you have discussed very clearly. It happened that last evening a friend talked about this matter and I briefly explained it to him, but not as systematically as you have done in this statement. (42:27b-29a)
59. Question: How is it that dry and withered things also possess the nature?
Answer: Because from the very beginning they possess this nature. This is why we say so. There is not a single thing in the universe that is outside nature.
Thereupon the Teacher walked up the step and said: The bricks of these steps have in them the principle of bricks. Then he sat down and said: A bamboo chair has in it the principle of the bamboo chair. It is correct to say that dry and withered things have no spirit of life, but it is incorrect to say that they have no principle of life. For example, rotten wood is useless except as fuel—there is in it no spirit of life. But when a particular kind of wood is burned, a particular kind of force is produced, each different from the other. This is so because of the principle originally inherent in it. (42:29b-30a)
60. Question: Principle is what is received from Heaven by both man and things. Do things without feelings also possess principle?
Answer: They of course have principle. For example, a ship can go only on water while a cart can go only on land. (42:30a)
61. Question: Man and birds and animals all have consciousness, although with varying degrees of penetration or impediment. Do plants also have consciousness?
Answer: Yes, they also have. Take a pot of flowers, for example. When watered, they flourish gloriously, but if broken off, they will wither and droop. Can they be said to be without consciousness? Chou Mao-shu (Chou Tun-i) did not cut the grass growing outside his window and said that he felt toward the grass as he felt toward himself.121 This shows that plants have consciousness [in so far as it has the spirit of life]. But the consciousness of animals is inferior to that of man, and that of plants is inferior to that of animals. Take also the example of the drug rhubarb, which, when taken, acts as a purgative, and the drug aconite, which, when taken, produces heat (vitality and strength). In these cases, the consciousness acts in one direction only.
When asked further whether decayed things also have consciousness, the Teacher said: They also have, as when burned into ashes, made into broth, and drunk, they will be caustic or bitter. (42:31b-32a)
5. Physical Nature
62. Nature is principle only. However, without the material force and concrete stuff of the universe, principle would have nothing in which to inhere. When material force is received in its state of clearness, there will be no obscurity or obstruction and principle will express itself freely. If there is obscurity or obstruction, then in its operation of principle, the Principle of Heaven will dominate if the obstruction is small and human selfish desire will dominate if the obstruction is great. From this we know that original nature is perfectly good. This is the nature described by Mencius as “good,”122 by Master Chou Tun-i as “pure and perfectly good,”123 and by Master Ch’eng I as “the fundamental character of our nature”124 and “the nature traced to the source of our being.”125 However, it will be obstructed if physical nature contains impurity. Hence, [as Chang Tsai said] “In physical nature there is that which the superior man denies to be his original nature,” and “If one learns to return to the original nature endowed by Heaven and Earth, then it will be preserved.”126 In our discussion of nature, we must include physical nature before the discussion can be complete. (43:2b-3a)
63. When we speak of the nature of Heaven and Earth, we refer to principle alone. When we speak of the physical nature, we refer to principle and material force combined. Before material force existed, basic nature was already in existence. Material force does not always exist, but nature is eternal. Although nature is implanted in material force, yet material force is still material force and nature is still nature, without being confused or mixed up. As to its immanence in things and universal existence, regardless of whether material force is refined or coarse, there is nothing without its principle. (43:3a-b)
64. The physical nature is no different from the nature of Heaven and Earth. The point is that the nature of Heaven and Earth runs through the physical nature. For example, the good nature is like water. The physical nature is as though you sprinkled some sauce and salt in it and it then acquired a peculiar flavor. (43:4a)
65. The nature of all men is good, and yet there are those who are good from their birth and those who are evil from their birth. This is because of the difference in material force with which they are endowed. The revolutions of the universe consist of countless variety and are endless. But these may be seen: If the sun and moon are clear and bright, and the climate temperate and reasonable, the man born at such a time and endowed with such material force, which is clear, bright, well-blended, and strong, should be a good man. But if the sun and moon are darkened and gloomy, and the temperature abnormal, all this is evidence of violent material force. There is no doubt that if a man is endowed with such material force, he will be a bad man. The objective of learning is to transform this material endowment. (43:4b)
66. Nature is like water. If it flows in a clean channel, it is clear, if it flows in a dirty channel, it becomes turbid. When physical nature that is clear and balanced is received, it will be preserved in its completeness. This is true of man. When physical nature that is turbid and unbalanced is received, it will be obscured. This is true of animals. Material force may be clear or turbid. That received by men is clear and that received by animals is turbid. Men mostly have clear material force; hence the difference between them and animals. However, there are some whose material force is turbid, and they are not far removed from animals. (43:7a-b)
67. Someone asked about the inequality in the clearness of the material endowment. The Teacher said: The differences in the material endowment are not limited to one kind and are not described only in terms of clearness and turbidity. There are men who are so bright that they know everything. Their material force is clear, but what they do may not all be in accord with principle. The reason is that their material force is not pure. There are others who are respectful, generous, loyal, and faithful. Their material force is pure, but in their knowledge they do not always penetrate principle. The reason is that their material force is not clear. From this you can deduce the rest. (42:8a)
68. Although nature is the same in all men, it is inevitable that [in most cases] the various elements in their material endowment are unbalanced. In some men the material force of Wood predominates. In such cases, the feeling of commiseration is generally uppermost, but the feeling of shame, of deference and compliance, and of right and wrong are impeded by the predominating force and do not emanate into action. In others, the material force of Metal predominates. In such cases, the feeling of shame is generally uppermost, but the other feelings are impeded and do not emanate into action. So with the material forces of Water and Fire. It is only when yin and yang are harmonized and the five moral natures (of humanity, righteousness, propriety, wisdom, and good faith) are all complete that a man has the qualities of the Mean and correctness and becomes a sage. (43:8a-b)
69. Question: Men often differ in the degree of clearness and purity. These are of course due to material endowment. By necessity their minds differ depending on their material endowment. Now, the mouth, the ear, and the eye, as well as the mind are all organs. Why is it that Heaven, in imparting the physical nature, invests the qualities of clearness and turbidity and purity and impurity only in the mind but not in the mouth, ear, or eye?. . . . Answer: The mouth, ear, and eye also differ in clearness and turbidity and in purity and impurity. For example, people like I-ya (famous cook of the seventh century b.c.), the music-master Kuang127 (music-master shortly before Confucius), and Li-lou (legendary figure famous for power of vision)128 preserved clearness in the highest degree. It is the same with the mind. (43:17a-b)
70. Question about man’s nature and destiny. Answer: If those born wise are completely and perfectly good, material force is there as material force and principle is there as principle, without any connection between each other. In such cases, there is no need to speak of the physical nature. But in the cases of men inferior to those born wise, [
those who learn through study to be wise, those who learn through hard work, and those who work hard but still do not learn],129 even the Principle of Nature is not deficient. Nevertheless it is tied up with material force. When material force is clear, principle will be obvious. When material force is turbid, principle will be obscured. The two—material force and principle—always go together, and therefore we designate this state as physical nature. It means that principle advances or retards depending on material force, and not to consider physical nature as the nature and destiny.
Answer: In the cases of those who are born wise, material force is extremely clear and principle is not obstructed. In the cases of those who learn to be wise and those below them, the clearness or turbidity of material force varies in degree. Whether principle is complete or incomplete depends on this. (43:18a)
A Source Book in Chinese Philosophy Page 75
