|
|
THE
ABDUCTION OF MODERNITY
Part III: Rule of law vs Confucianism
By
Henry C K
Liu
Part
1: The race toward barbarism
Part
2: That old time religion
The rule
of law has been touted frequently by Western scholars as a
central aspect of modernity. According to that measure of
periodization, since the rule of law was the basis of the first
unification of China in the 2nd century BC, modernity occurred 23
centuries ago in China.
Researchers
have pointed out that at the end of the 17th century, while
the Chinese empire often appeared in English literature as a metaphor
for "tyranny", such as in the works of Daniel Defoe, best known for his
1719 novel Robinson
Crusoe, it was also at
times praised for
its legal code long established on ideals of order, morality, and good
government, such as in the work of Lady Mary Chudleigh, to the more
uniform perception of China's legal system at the turn of the century,
when George Henry Mason published The Punishments of China
(1801). Michel Foucault's analytical approach to history highlights the
limitations of European efforts to comprehend China's moral, juridical
and legal structures.
The
promulgation of a new edition of law, known as the Tang Code of
Perpetual Splendor (Tang
Yonghui Lu), in the
10th lunar month
in the fourth year of the reign of Perpetual Splendor (Yonghui)
of the Tang Dynasty, in AD 653, was in reality just an update effort,
based on the original Tang Code (Tang Lu), which in turn was
based on the Sui Code (Sui
Lu), which had
initially been
compiled 73 years earlier by the late founding Civil Emperor (Wendi)
of the preceding Sui Dynasty and updated ever since by every succeeding
sovereign. But the Tang Code of Perpetual Splendor is singled out by
history, mostly because of its definitive comprehensiveness.
The
original Tang Code was promulgated 29 years earlier, in 624, by the
founding High Grand Emperor (Gaozu) of the Tang Dynasty. It
would become in modern times the earliest fully preserved legal code in
the history of Chinese law. It was endowed with a commentary, known as Tanglu
Shuyi, incorporated in
653, the fourth year of the reign of
Perpetual Splendor, as part of the Tang Code of Perpetual Splendor.
The Tang
Code was based on the Code of Northern Zhou (Bei Zhou Lu,
557-581), promulgated 89 years earlier in 564, which was in turn based
on the earlier, less comprehensive and less elaborate Code of Cao Wei (Cao
Wei Lu, 220-265) and the Code of Western Jin (Xi Jin Lu,
265-317) promulgated almost four centuries earlier in 268.
Western
perception on the alleged underdevelopment of law in Chinese
civilization is based on both factual ignorance and cultural bias.
Chinese dismissal of the rule of law is not a rejection of modernity,
but a rejection of primitiveness. Confucian attitude places low
reliance on law and punishment for maintaining social order. Evidence
of this can be found in the Aspiration (Zhi) section of the
200-volume Old Book on
Tang (Jiu Tang Shu), a
magnum opus of
Tang historiography. The history classic was compiled under official
supervision in 945 during the Late Jin Dynasty (Hou Jin,
936-946) of the era of Five Generations (Wudai, 907-960), some
three centuries after the actual events. A single chapter on Punishment
and Law (Xingfa) places last after seven
chapters on Rites (Liyi),
after which come four chapters on Music (Yinyue), three
chapters on Calendar (Li), two on Astronomy and Astrology (Tianwen),
one on Physics (Wuheng), four on Geography (Dili),
three on Hierarchy of Office (Zhiguan), one on Carriages and
Costume (Yufu), two on Sutras and Books (Jingji), two
on Commodities (Chihuo) and finally comes a single
chapter
Punishment and Law, in that order.
The
Confucian Code of Rites (Liji) is expected to be the
controlling document on civilized behavior, not law. In the Confucian
world view, rule of law is applied only to those who have fallen beyond
the bounds of civilized behavior. Civilized people are expected to
observe proper rites. Only social outcasts are expected to have their
actions controlled by law. Thus the rule of law is considered a state
of barbaric primitiveness, prior to achieving the civilized state of
voluntary observation of proper rites. What is legal is not necessarily
moral or just.
Under the
supervision of Tang Confucian minister Fang Xuanling, 500
sections of ancient laws were compiled into 12 volumes in the Tang
Code, titled:
Vol 1: Term
and Examples (Mingli)
Vol 2: Security and Forbiddance (Weijin)
Vol 3: Office and Hierarchy (Zhizhi)
Vol 4: Domestic Matters and Marriage (Huhun)
Vol 5: Stables and Storage (Jiuku)
Vol 6: Impeachment and Promotion (Shanxing)
Vol 7: Thievery and Robbery (Zeidao)
Vol 8: Contest and Litigation (Dousong)
Vol 9: Deceit and Falsehood (Zhawei)
Vol 10: Miscellaneous Regulation (Zalu)
Vol 11: Arrest and Escape (Buwang)
Vol 12: Judgment and Imprisonment (Duanyu)
The Tang
Code lists five forms of corporal punishment:
1.
Flogging (Chi)
2. Caning
(Zhang)
3.
Imprisonment (Tu)
4. Exile (Liu)
5. Death (Si)
Leniency
is applied to Eight Considerations (Bayi):
1. Blood
relation
2. Motive
for the crime
3. Virtue
of the culprit
4.
Ability of the culprit
5. Past
merits
6.
Nobility status
7.
Friendship
8.
Diligent character
Criminals
above age 90 and those under age seven received only
suspended sentences. For others, sentences could be redeemed by cash
payments. A death sentence was worth 120 catties of copper coins (1
catty = 1.33 pounds). Officials were entitled to discounts on sentences
on private civil offenses: those of Fifth Ranks and above were entitled
to a reduction of two years; those of ninth rank and above were
entitled to one year; but for public crimes, an additional year was
added to the sentence for all officials.
Exempt
from leniency are 10 Categories of Wickedness (Shiwu):
1. Conspiratorial sedition (moufan) 2. Conspiratorial grand
rebellion (moudani) 3. Conspiratorial
insubordination (moupan)
4. Conspiratorial vicious rebelliousness (moueni) 5. Immorality (budao) 6. Disrespectfulness (bujing)
7. Deficiency in filial virtue (buxiao) 8. Antisocial behavior (bulu)
9. Unrighteousness and disloyalty (buyi) 10. Instigation of
internal chaos (neiluan)
The
Chinese term for "law" is fa-lu. The word fa means
"method". The word lu means "standard". In other
words, law is
a methodical standard for behavior in society. A musical instrument
with resonant tubes that form the basis of musical scales, the Chinese
equivalent of the tuning fork, is also called lu. In law, the
word lu implies a standard scale for
measuring social behavior
of civilized men.
The first
comprehensive code of law in China had been compiled by the
Origin Qin Emperor (Qin
Shihuangdi, reigned 246-210 BC), unifier
of China. Known as the Qin Code (Qin Lu), it was a political
instrument as well as a legal one. It was the legislative manifestation
of a Legalist political vision. It aimed at instituting uniform rules
for prescribing appropriate social behavior in a newly unified social
order. It sought to substitute fragmented traditional local practices,
left from the ancient regime of privileged aristocratic lineages. It
tried to dismantle Confucian exemptions accorded to special
relationships based on social hierarchies and clan connections.
The
pervasive growth of new institutions in the unifying Qin Dynasty
(221-207 BC) was the result of objective needs of a rising
civilization. Among these new institutions was a unified legal system
of impartial rewards and punishments according to well-promulgated and
clearly defined codes of prescribed behavior. The law was enforced
through the practice of lianzuo (linked seats), a form of
social control by imposing criminal liability on the perpetrator's clan
members, associates and friends. Qin culture heralded the later
emergence of a professional shidafu (literati-bureaucrat) based
on meritocracy. It also introduced a uniform system of weights,
measures and monetary instruments and it established standard trade
practices for the smooth operation of a unified economic system for the
whole empire. The effect of Qin Legalist governance on Chinese
political culture pushed Chinese civilization a great step forward
toward forging an unified nation and culture, but in the process lost
much of the richness of its ancient, local traditions and rendered many
details of its fragmented past incomprehensible to posterity.
In the
first half of the Han Dynasty (206 BC-AD 220), the Han imperial
government adopted the Legalist policies of the Qin Dynasty it had
replaced. It systemically expanded its power over tribal guizu
by wholesale adaptation of Legalist political structure from the brief
(15 years) but consequential reign of the preceding Qin Dynasty.
Gradually, with persistent advice from Confucian ministers, in
obsessive quest for dependable political loyalty to the Han dynastic
house, Legalist policies of equal justice for all were abandoned in
favor of Confucian tendencies of formalized exemptions from law,
cemented with special relationships (guanxi) based on social
positions and kinship. The Tang Code, promulgated in AD 624,
institutionalized this Confucian trend by codifying it. It would lay
the foundation for a hierarchal social structure that would generate a
political culture that would resist the proposition that all men are
created equal to mean similarity. In Confucian culture, civilized man
is created as closely connected individuals to form building blocks of
society. It is the universality of man that celebrates individualism,
not the Western notion of alienation as individualism.
Elaborately
varied degrees of punishment are accorded by the Tang Code
to the same crime committed by persons of different social stations,
just as Confucian rites ascribe varying lengths of mourning periods to
the survivors of the deceased of various social ranks. According to
Confucian logic, if the treatment for death, the most universal of
fates, is not socially equal, why should it be for the treatment for
crime? William Blake (1757-1827), born 23 centuries after Confucius
(551-479 BC), would epitomize the problem of legal fairness in search
for true justice, by his famous pronouncement: "One law for the lion
and the ox is oppression." Confucians are not against the concept of
equal justice for all; they merely have a sophisticated notion of the
true meaning of justice.
In
Chinese history, the entrenched political feudal order relies on the
philosophical concepts of Confucianism (Ru Jia). The rising
agricultural capitalistic order draws on the ideology of Legalism (Fa
Jia). These two
philosophical postures, Confucianism and Legalism,
in turn construct alternative and opposing moral contexts, each
providing rationalization for the ultimate triumph of its respective
sponsoring social order.
The
struggle between these two competing social orders has been going
on, with alternating periods of triumph for each side, since the
Legalist Qin Dynasty first united China in 221 BC, after 26 years of
unification war. The effect of this struggle was still visible in the
politics of contemporary China, particularly during the Great
Proletariat Cultural Revolution of 1966-78, when the Gang of Four
promoted Legalist concepts to attack the existing order, accusing it of
being Confucian in philosophy and counterrevolutionary in ideology. To
the extent that "left" and "right" convey meaningful images in modern
political nomenclature, Taoism (Dao Jia) would be to the left
of Confucianism as Legalism would be to the right.
Modern
Legalists in China, such as the so-called Gang of Four, were the
New Left, whose totalitarian zeal to promote social justice converged,
in style if not in essence, with the New Right, or neo-conservatives of
the West, in its reliance on authoritarian zeal to defend
individualism. Thus the notion that modernity is a Western phenomenon
is highly problematic.
The
flowering of Chinese philosophy in the 5th century BC was not
accidental. By that time, after the political disintegration of the
ancient Xi Zhou Dynasty (Western Zhou, 1027-771 BC), Chinese society
was at a crossroads in its historical development. Thus an eager market
emerged for various rival philosophical underpinnings to rationalize a
wide range of different, competing social systems. The likes of
Confucius were crisscrossing the fragmented political landscape of
petty independent kingdoms, seeking fame and fortune by hawking their
moral precepts and political programs to ambitious and opportunistic
monarchs.
Traditionally,
members of the Chinese guizu (the aristocracy)
were descendants of hero warriors who provided meritorious service to
the founder of a dynasty. Relatives of huangdi (the emperor),
provided they remained in political good graces, also became
aristocrats by birthright, although technically they were members of huangzu
(the imperial clan). The emperor lived in constant fear of this guizu
class, more than he feared the peasants, for guizu members had
the means and political ambition for successful coups. Peasant
uprisings in Chinese history have been rare, only seven uprisings in
4,000 years of recorded history up to the modern time. Moreover, these
uprisings have tended to aim at local abuse of power rather than at
central authority. Aristocratic coups, on the other hand, have been
countless and frequent.
In four
millennia, Chinese history recorded 559 emperors. Approximately
one-third of them suffered violent deaths from aristocratic plots,
while none had been executed by rebelling peasants.
The
political function of the emperor was to keep peace and order among
contentious nobles and to protect peasants from aristocratic abuse.
This was the basic rationale of government as sovereign. A sovereign,
whether an emperor or a president, without the loyal support of
peasants, euphemistically referred to as the Mandate of Heaven (Tianming),
would soon find himself victim of a palace coup or aristocratic revolt.
This is the socialist root of all governments. The neo-liberal claim of
the proper role of government as ensuring a free market is a capitalist
cooptation of government.
The Code
of Rites (Liji), the ritual compendium as
defined by
Confucius, circumscribed acceptable personal behavior for all in a
hierarchical society. It established rules of appropriate
socio-political conduct required in a feudal civilization.
Unfortunately, ingrained conditioning by conservative Confucian
teaching inevitably caused members of the aristocratic class to
degenerate in time from truly superior stock into mediocre and decadent
seekers of unearned privileges. Such degeneration was brought about by
the nature of their privileged life and the false security derived from
a Confucian superiority complex. Although the process might sometimes
take centuries to take shape, some dynasties would crumble within
decades through the unchecked excesses of their ruling classes.
Confucianism,
by promoting unquestioning loyalty toward authority,
encouraged the powerful to abuse their power, despite Confucianism's
reliance on ritual morality as a mandate for power. Confucianism is
therefore inescapably the victim of its own success, as Taoists are
fond of pointing out.
Generally,
those who feel they can achieve their political objectives
without violence would support the Code of Rites. While those whose
political objectives are beyond the reach of non-violent, moral
persuasion would dismiss it as a tool of oppression. Often, those who
attacked the Code of Rites during their rise to power would find it
expedient to promote, after achieving power, the very code they
belittled before, since they soon realized that the Code of Rites was
the most effective governing tool for a sitting ruler.
To
counter hostile tendencies toward feudal values and to ensure
allegiance to the feudal system, keju (civil examinations),
while providing equal opportunity to all talented, were designed to
test candidates on their knowledge of a syllabus of Confucian doctrines
contained in the Five Classics (Wujing). Confucian ethics were
designed to buttress the terms of traditional social contract. They
aimed to reduce potential for violent conflict between the arrived and
the arriving. They aimed to channel the powerful energy of the arriving
into a constructive force for social renewal. Confucian ethics aimed to
forge in perpetuity a continuing non-violent dialectic eclecticism, to
borrow a Hegelian term for the benefit of Western comprehension.
The
violent overthrow of the government, a criminal offense in the
United States, is a moral sin in Confucian ethics. It is therefore
natural that budding revolutionaries should attack Confucian ethics as
reactionary, and that those already in power should tirelessly promote
Confucian ethics as the only proper code of behavior for a
self-renewing, civilized socio-political order. In Chinese politics,
Confucianism is based on a theory of rule by self-restraint. It
advocates the sacredness of hierarchy and the virtue of loyalty. It is
opposed by Legalism, which subscribes to a theory of rule by universal
law and impartial enforcement. Again, the Western claim that the rule
of law is a unique foundation of modernity peculiar to the West is
historically unsubstantiated.
Although
Buddhists have their own disagreements with Legalist concepts,
particularly on the issue of mercy, which they value as a virtue while
Legalists detest it as the root of corruption, such disagreements are
muted by Buddhist appreciation of Legalist opposition to both
Confucianism and Taoism, ideological nemeses of Buddhism (Fo Jiao).
Above all, Buddhists need for their own protection Legalism's
opposition to selective religious persecution. Legalism, enemy of
Buddhism's enemies, is selected by Buddhists as a convenient ally.
Legalism
places importance on three aspects. The first is shi
(authority), which is based on the legitimacy of the ruler and the
doctrinal orthodoxy of his policies. The second is shu (skill)
in manipulative exercise of power, and the third is fa (law),
which, once publicly proclaimed, should govern universally without
exceptions. These three aspects Legalists consider as three pillars of
a well-governed society. If the rule of law is a characteristic of
modernity, then modernity arrived in China in 3rd century BC.
According
to Confucian political theory, the essential political
function of all subjects is to serve the emperor, not personally, but
as sovereign, who is the sole legitimate personification of the
political order and sovereign of the political realm. Legalists argue
that while all powers emanate by right from the Son of Heaven, the
proper execution of these powers can take place only within an
impartial system of law. While people should be taught their ritual
responsibilities, they should at the same time be held responsible by
law not only for each person's individual acts but also for one
another's conducts, as an extensive form of social control within a
good community. Therefore, punishment should be meted out to not only
the culprit, but also to his relatives, friends, associates and
neighbors, for negligence of their ritual duties in constraining the
culprit. This is natural for a society in which the individual is
inseparable from community.
Efficiency
of government and equal justice for all are cardinal rules
of good politics. Legalists believe that administration of the state
should be entrusted to officials appointed according to merit, rather
than to hereditary nobles or literati with irrelevant scholarship. Even
granting validity to the extravagant Taoist claim that ideas, however
radical, are inherently civilized and noble, Legalists insist that when
ideas are transformed into unbridled action, terror, evil, vulgarity
and destruction emerge. Freedom of thought must be balanced by rule of
law to restrain the corruption of ideas by action.
Whereas
being well versed in Confucianism bound the shidafu
class culturally as faithful captives to the imperial system, such
rigid mentality ironically also rendered its subscribers indifferent to
objective problem-solving. Thus Confucianism, by its very nature, would
ensure eventual breakdown of the established order, at which point
Legalism would gain ascendancy for a period, to put in place new
policies and laws that would be more responsive to objective
conditions. But Confucians took comfort in the fact that, in time, the
new establishment that Legalists put in charge would discover the
utilitarian advantage of Confucianism to the ruling elite. And the
cycle of conservative consolidation would start once again. Generally,
periods of stability and steady decay would last longer than intervals
of violent renewal through Legalist reform, so that Confucianism would
become more ingrained after each cycle. Western capitalism is in
essence a feudal system, supported by a legal system that legitimizes
property rights and class distinction based on private capital
ownership. In contemporary Chinese political nomenclature, the
proletariat is defined not merely as workers, but the property-less
class.
This
perpetual, cyclical development proves to the Taoist mind that
indeed "life goes in circles". It is an astute observation made by the
ancient sage Laozi, father of Taoism, who lived during the 6th century
BC and who was the alleged ancestor of the Tang imperial clan of 7th
century AD.
The
so-called Gang of Four promoted Legalist politics in China in the
1970s. They used Marxist orthodox doctrine, reinforced by the Maoist
personality cult, as shi (influence), Communist party
discipline as shu (skill) for exercising power,
and dictatorial
rule as fa (laws) to be obeyed with no
exceptions allowed for
tradition, ancient customs or special relationships and with little
regard for human conditions. Legalists yearn for a perfectly
administered state, even if the price is the unhappiness of its
citizens. They seek an inviolable system of impartial justice, without
extenuating allowances, even at the expense of the innocent. When a
priori truth appears
threatened by fidelity in logic, Confucians
predictably always rely on faithful loyalty to tradition as a final
argument.
Confucius,
the quintessential conservative, the most influential
philosopher in Chinese culture, admired the idealized society of the
ancient Xi Zhou Dynasty, when men purportedly lived in harmony under
sage rulers.
The fact
that the Zhou Dynasty had been a feudal society based on
slavery did not concern Confucius. To the idealist Confucius,
hierarchical stations in human society were natural and symbiotic. If
everyone would contentedly do his duty according to his particular
station in society, and with an accepting state of mind known as anfen,
then all men would benefit as social life meliorates toward an ideal
state of high civilization.
To
Confucius, the lot of a slave in a good society was preferable to
that of a lord in a society marked by chaos and uncivilized immorality.
Violent social changes would only create chaos, which would bring decay
and destruction to all, lords and slaves alike. Such violent changes
would kill the patient in the process of fighting the disease.
Confucius apparently never sought the opinion of any slave on this
matter.
Like
Plato, Confucius conceived a world in which the timeless ideal of
morality constitutes the perfect reality, of which the material world
is but a flawed reflection.
The Zhou
people, according to Confucius - in stark contrast to
historical fact - aspired to be truthful, wise, good and righteous.
They allegedly observed meticulously their social ritual obligation (li)
and with clear understanding of the moral content of such rites.
Confucius never explained why the Zhou people failed so miserably in
their noble aspirations, or the cause of their eventual fall from
civilized grace.
In the
Confucian world view, men have degenerated since the fall of the
Zhou Dynasty. As a result of barbarian invasions of Chinese society and
of natural atrophy, social order has broken down. But, being
fundamentally good, men can be salvaged through education, the key to
which is moral examples, emanating from the top, because the wisest in
an ideal society would naturally rise to the top. And they have a
responsibility to teach the rest of society by the examples of their
moral behavior.
Chinese
audiences always enjoy hearing that greatness in Chinese
culture is indigenous while decadence is solely the influence of
foreign barbarians. Collective self-criticism, unlike xenophobia, has
never been a favorite Chinese preoccupation. Chinese narcissism differs
from Western narcissism in that superiority is based not on physical
power but on social benevolence. From the Chinese historical
perspective, the defeat of civilized Athens at the hand of militant
Sparta set the entire Western civilization on the wrong footing. It
represented the triumph of barbarism from which the West has never
recovered.
The Zhou
people that Confucius idolized traced their ancestry to the
mythical deity Houji, god of agriculture. This genealogical claim had
no factual basis in history. Rather, it had been invented by the Zhou
people to mask their barbaric origin as compared with the superior
culture of the preceding Shang Dynasty (1600-1028 BC), which they had
conquered and whose culture they had appropriated, just as the Romans
invented Aeneas, mythical Trojan hero, son of Anchises and Venus, as
father of their lineage to give themselves an ancestor as cultured and
ancient as those of the more sophisticated Greeks. The Tang imperial
house was at least humble enough to coopt only Laozi, a real historical
figure rather than a god.
The
historic figure responsible for the flowering of Zhou culture was
Ji Dan, Duke of Zhou, known reverently as Zhougong in Chinese. Zhougong
was the third-ranking brother of the founding Martial King (Wuwang,
1027-1025 BC) of the Zhou Dynasty. The Martial King claimed to be a
17th-generation descendant of the god Houji, who allegedly gave the
Chinese people the gift of agriculture. In Chinese politics,
appropriation of mythical celebrities as direct ancestors of political
rulers started long before the claim by the Tang imperial house on
Laozi, founder of Taoism.
Zhougong
introduced to Chinese politics the practice of hereditary
monarchy based on the principle of primogeniture. He put an end to the
ancient tribal custom of the Shang Dynasty of crowning the next younger
brother of a deceased king.
In
defiance of established tradition, after the death of the Martial
King (Wuwang) of the Zhou Dynasty in 1025 BC, Zhougong, third-ranking
brother, arranged to usurp the dragon throne for his nephew, Cheng
Wang, 12-year-old son of the deceased Martial King. The move bypassed
Zhougong's older, second-ranking brother, Ji Guanxu, the legitimate
traditional heir according to ancient tribal custom. Ji Guanxu rebelled
in protest to defend his legitimate right to succeed his deceased older
brother. But he was defeated and killed in battle by Zhougong.
Hereditary
monarchy based on the principle of primogeniture as
established by Zhougong has since been viewed by historians as the
institution that launched modern political statehood out of primitive
tribal nationhood. It has been credited with having fundamentally
advanced Chinese civilization. Modernity began with the nation-state,
and in China that transition occurred more than a millennium before the
birth of Christ.
Having
acted as regent for seven years on behalf of Cheng Wang
(1024-1005 BC), his under-aged nephew king, the fratricidal Zhougong
returned political power, some would say involuntarily, to the fully
grown Cheng Wang. The descendants of Cheng Wang upheld hereditary
monarchy in the Zhou Dynasty for three more centuries and firmly
established primogeniture as an unquestioned tradition in Chinese
political culture.
Zhougong
gave Chinese civilization the Five Rites and the Six
Categories of Music, which form the basis of civilization. Confucian
idealism manifests human destiny in a civilization rooted in morality
as defined by the Code of Rites, without which man would revert back to
the state of wild beasts. Zhougong was credited with having established
feudalism as a socio-political order during his short regency of only
seven years. He institutionalized it with an elaborate system of Five
Rites (Wuli) that has survived the passage
of time.
The Five
Rites are:
1. Rites
governing social relationships
2. Rites
governing behavioral codes
3. Rites
governing codes of dress
4. Rites
governing marriage
5. Rites
governing burial practices
He also
established Six Categories of Music (Liuluo) for all
ritual occasions, giving formal ceremonial expression to social
hierarchy. Confucius revered Zhougong as the father of formal Chinese
feudal culture. The son of Zhougong, by the name of Ji Baqin, had been
bestowed the First Lord of the State of Lu by Cheng Wang (1024-1005
BC), second-generation ruler of the Zhou dynasty who owed his dragon
throne to Zhougong, his third-ranking uncle. Five centuries later, the
State of Lu became the adopted home of Confucius, who had been born in
the State of Song.
However,
the pragmatic descendants of Zhougong in the State of Lu did
not find appealing the revivalist advice of Confucius, even when such
advice had been derived from the purported wisdom of Zhougong, their
illustrious ancestor. Confucius, as an old sage, had to peddle his
moralist ideas in other neighboring states for a meager living. In
despair, Confucius, the frustrated rambling philosopher, was recorded
to have lamented in resignation: "It has been too long since I last
visited Zhougong in my dreams."
The
essential idea underlying the political thinking in Confucian
philosophy is that fallen men require the control of repressive
institutions to restore their innate potential for goodness. According
to Confucius, civilization is the inherent purpose of human life, not
conquest. To advance civilization is the responsibility of the wise and
the cultured, both individually and collectively. Enlightened
individuals should teach ignorant individuals. Cultured nations should
bring civilization to savage tribes.
A
superior ruler should cultivate qualities of a virtuous man. His
virtue would then influence his ministers around him. They in turn
would be examples to others of lower ranks, until all men in the realm
are permeated with noble, moral aptitude. The same principle of
trickle-down morality would apply to relations between strong and weak
nations and between advanced and developing cultures and economies.
Rudyard
Kipling's notion of "the white man's burden" would be Confucian
in principle, provided that one agrees with his interpretation of the
"superiority" of the white man's culture. Modern Confucians would
consider Kipling (1865-1936) as having confused Western material
progress with moral superiority, as measured by a standard based on
virtue.
Confucius
would have thoroughly approved of the ideas put forth by
Plato (427-347 BC) in the Republic, in which a philosopher king
rules an ideal kingdom where all classes happily go about performing
their prescribed separate socio-economic functions.
Taoists
would comment that if only life were so neat and simple, there
would be no need for philosophy.
Confucian
ideas have aspects that are similar to Christian beliefs,
only down side up. Christ taught the pleasure-seeking and power-craving
Greco-Roman world to love the weak and imitate the poor, whose souls
were proclaimed as pure. Confucius taught the materialistic Chinese to
admire the virtuous and respect the highly placed, whose characters
were presumed to be moral.
The word ren, a Chinese term for human
virtue, means "proper
human relationship". Without exact equivalent in English, the word ren
is composed by combining the ideogram "man" with the numeral 2, a
concept necessitated by the plurality of mankind and the quest for
proper interpersonal relationship. It is comparable to the Greek
concept of humanity and the Christian notion of divine love, the very
foundation of Christianity.
Confucius'
well-known admonition, "Do not unto others that which you
not wish to have done to yourself," has been frequently compared with
Christ's teaching, "Love thy neighbor as thyself." Both lead to the
same end, but from opposite directions. Confucius was less intrusively
interfering but, of course, unlike Christ, he had the benefit of having
met Laozi, founder of Taoism and consummate proponent of benign
non-interference. A close parallel was proclaimed by Hillel (30 BC-AD
10), celebrated Jewish scholar and president of the Sanhedrin, in his
famous maxim: "Do not unto others that which is hateful unto thee."
By
observing rites of Five Relationships, each individual would clearly
understand his social role, and each would voluntarily behave according
to proper observance o | | |