Human Nature, Literature and Culture:

Moral Purification and Social Transformation

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PREFACE

INTRODUCTION

PART I

THE CONCEPT OF MORAL PURIFICATION IN CONFUCIAN PHILOSOPHY

1. THE PROBLEM OF HUMAN NATURE

Is There a “Human Nature”?

Mencius’s Theory of Human Nature

Hsun Tze’s Theory of Human Nature

Education as a Way to Morality

The Concept of Purification in Confucian Education

Language as a Vehicle for Morality

The Teaching of Ethics

2. THE PROGRESSIVE APPROACH OF MORAL PURIFICATION

Cultivation of Individual Virtue

The Value of Sincerity

“KO”: Changing is Purging in Social Structure

Unity of Knowledge and Action: Lao Tzu’s Way

Unity of Heaven and Man

3. PROPRIETY AND RIGHTNESS: A SOCIAL ORGANIC ETHICS

Social Values in Confucianism

4. THE POPULAR VERSION OF THE CONCEPT OF MORAL PURIFICATION IN CHINESE LITERATURE

The Chinese Literary Tradition

Purification of Individuals

Purification in Traditional Chinese Folk Tales

The Purification of Society

Celestial, Legal, and Moral Disorder

Low Morals in High Society

The Quest for Purification

A Lesson from History

PART II

THE CONCEPT OF MORAL PURIFICATION IN CHRISTIAN TEACHINGS

5. POLLUTION SEPARATION AND PURIFICATION

The Source of the Pollution

The Means of True Purification

6. PERSONAL SALVATION AND A COMMUNITY OF SAINTS

From Sinner to Saint: Augustine’s Spiritual Progress

Religious Education: A Beginning to Salvation

The Bible Teaching and Purification

The Exemplary Pastor: Richard Baxter Reformed a Community

7. PRACTICAL ETHICS AS MORAL KNOWLEDGE: ST. THOMAS AQUINAS AND NICOMACHEAN ETHICS

From Aristotle to Aquinas in Ethical Thinking

The Path to Purification

8. PHILOSOPHICAL IDEAS OF MORAL PURIFICATION IN ELIZABETHAN AND PURITAN ENGLAND

The Puritan Age and Puritan Ideas

9. POETRY PROMOTES THE NOTION OF MORAL PURIFICATION

Is There Any Puritanism in Shakespeare?

The Concept of Purification in the “Dark Lady” Sonnets

The Dark Lady: Who She Is and What She Does

The Dark Lady and Dark Lust

The Concept of Purification Among Other Poets

The Puritans’ Poet: John Milton

10. PLAY IS THE THING ADVOCATES MORAL PURIFICATION

Will as a Christian and Puritan Element

The New Role of Will in Shakespearean Characters

The Importance of Purification in Political Life

From The Tempest to Calm Seas: Temptation, Purification, and Reconciliation

The Puritan Imprint

CONCLUSION

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Preface

Seeking happiness in life is a goal as old as mankind itself. But most of us are quite unsure about what the word “happiness” means or should mean to us.

To Chinese people, and to Confucianists in particular, happiness does not mean hedonistic and self-centered pleasure or immorality, not even self-enlightenment. Happiness involves freeing one's heart from the enslavement of bodily desire, so as to lead a righteous life for the benefit of others. The Chinese word-character “heart,” used here, traditionally is synonymous with “mind.” However, it does not mean “head” as a brain kept separate from feeling, as in the mind/body dichotomy imposed by Western civilization. The Chinese “heart” combines both thinking and emotion.

To Christians, in contrast, true happiness means eternal and ultimate bliss. This state of being originates from God's prevenient grace, which reveals the Truth and thus initiates one's acceptance of Christ as one's personal Savior. The result is salvation, spiritual rebirth, and renewal by the Holy Spirit – thereby transforming and purifying man's sinful nature and selfish desires. Living now for God's glory enables one to carry out the Cultural Mandate before entering the everlasting Heavenly bliss.

  Modern technology born of science can send our bodies up into outer space; yet our souls may not soar with them, for they are held down to Earth. They are captives of a plodding philosophy that tells us that we are made of molecules only, each cell its own mini-universe of bits of electromagnetic charges that attract and repel each other for so long as they adhere or collide.

  We have been informed by this science that no longer is there an eternity, the promise of immortality in bliss, or an all-seeing and all-knowing God Who rules both Heaven and Earth and in so doing sets the immutable rules for humans to live by. Deprived of divine guidance, since we are told that this small, fleeting life experienced daily is the only reality we will ever have, we must seize our bodily pleasures and desires to possess things this – very instant wresting them from others if need be. Nobody and nothing holds us to toe a fine ethical line. We are not schooled to be sensitive to others' needs and rights. We are assigned few responsibilities in fashioning our conduct within the human community surrounding us or in the natural world. We want whatever we want – now. Who is there to deny us? Not God, certainly.

  Religion traditionally has given values and moral codes and explicit answers to human beings who require or request them. Religious beliefs and philosophies as well as practices are found among all peoples, from small tribes in jungles and deserts to huge populations in vast, sprawling metropolises. Even a political system can operate as a state-prescribed religion. It educates its people accordingly to worship prophet-saints who espoused particular tenets dealing with the relationships of man to society, among the persons within that society, and between that society and an outside world of nonbelievers – usually considered and treated as hostile, ignorant and less than fully human.

  Whenever and wherever a religion or system of political thinking has reigned supreme, doubters arise who must question it. Some daringly defy and revolt against the status quo. If they are charismatic and determined, they attract others who join their cause. Their dedicated efforts, when reform-minded, often bring about beneficial changes within a system that recognizes the need for positive response. At other times, especially when rulers or leaders refuse to heed their warnings, reformers bring down the entire system. If they then attempt to replace outworn creeds by imposing their own truths and codes, they risk becoming tyrants themselves. They are also social agitators who die prematurely, whether martyred while asserting some cause they consider noble and just, or killed because they prove no better than the rulers of the system they oppose.

  The histories of both East and West are full of legends, factual or mythical, of attempts to establish or restore morality in society. The most powerful tales, tales with moral lessons, are embedded so deeply in a culture's history that it is difficult to decide how much are facts, how much fiction. We hear and read these stories of heroic efforts to make people pure in thought and deed -- models that set the highest standards of morality against which we are expected to measure ourselves. In these terms, proclaimed in various forms by all world religions, human culture has gone badly astray from its intended route toward the perfection that civilization originally was poised to bring.

  In the Bible, God promised such perfection only to those who labored toward it in the long and hard journey taken by each soul, sometimes in the dark, with unsure footsteps on paths unseen but felt. This view tells us that we will not be handed true happiness upon some silver platter conferred to us. To obtain them, there is much work for us to do. The work goes on within our individual souls, and it also goes on in community with others.

  In China, Confucian philosophers and Confucius-inspired writers for two and a half millennia have been giving much the same message to the world. They have done so, however, without the same theological base in God the Father and His Son, Jesus Christ, who offer a plan for spiritual redemption.

  As individuals and as a society we cannot live satisfactorily on a regimen of amoral scientific information and methodology alone. Each of us needs to achieve a beatific wisdom that will enable us to live meaningfully and morally, within ourselves and with others in the world. Descriptive knowledge known to and espoused by science is neither the means nor the end to individual human happiness and societal well-being. We need a prescriptive ethical knowledge to guide toward a perfectibility that Divine Providence holds out to us. However, most of us usually fail to achieve happiness because we take the wrong pathway while pursuing goals that satisfy selfish desires or are corrupted by a lust for power and control over others.

  It is time to retrace ancient paths taken by others before us – to seek within documentary records of the human past some potent solutions that will serve us today... if, indeed, understanding and interpreting our distant past will aid us in the awful predicament we find ourselves in. For we are wandering, lost and bewildered, without signposts or guides, in a moral wilderness. Sometimes we do not even know where the cardinal points are: north, south, east, west – up or down, Hell or Heaven.

  How might we be reoriented, away from dark moral chaos and toward our innate perfectibility?

  Our age has very few bona-fide leaders – untainted heroes or heroines who proclaim and live out great moral truths. So we must look to the past to find wisdom and some models who both exemplified and elucidated it. These are people who traveled long before us through this benighted wilderness. And whether after years of stumbling they suddenly encountered The Way, or were carried along intuitively by strong inner visions, they achieved their goal: true happiness.

  I propose here a journey, a course of reconsidering ancient wisdom issuing from two founts, East and West: Confucianism and Christianity. Specifically, I will search for a concept that is known as moral purification.

  Purification rites are known in all cultures. They serve to remove perceived taints and then to restore or elevate people to an acceptable or honorable status. The “unclean” or corrupt condition may be considered physical, moral, or spiritual. It may be inherent or acquired. Most frequently the rites involve water or fire as symbols, but sometimes they may be pure feeling states, undergone by an individual in solitude, which effect a spiritual purification that reorganizes one's ethical thinking and redirects his or her future moral behavior.

  Here, however, I will only deal with moral purification. By this means, people – and through them the society in which they dwell – can be regenerated, to find morality, meaning and mission in their lives. Such purification is the way to attain the ultimate bliss that all human beings inherently seek.

  The wisdom accrued from the past – from philosophers, prophets, preachers, and writers – has much to give us as we seek to regenerate ourselves and human society. For if we do not measurably improve, a cataclysm awaits us all.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

First of all, the author wishes to express his sincere gratitude to God for His grace and guidance through the course the course of life and throughout this study; he is also thankful for the Bible and spiritual guide and inspiration.

Thanks are surely due to Dr. Mortimer J. Adler, whose incisive writings have benefitted and enlightened the author's understanding of the vital importance of ethical science to society.

Grateful thanks and appreciation go to all his teachers in the past, who taught him in one way or another and enhanced his learning.

Lastly, the author conveys a special thanks to his loving wife, Elizabeth, for her sacrifice and support during the course of the undertaking this studey.

INTRODUCTION

As a philosophy of life, Confucianism teaches people that living well or morally means to use one's own personal assets and skills to help others in society. In other words, we must not aim simply to make ourselves happy, but should always try to enrich the lives of others in ever-widening circles, thereby potentially benefiting the whole of humankind.

  This altruistic belief system, originating in the sixth to fifth century B.C. with Confucius – the “Great Master,” or K'ung-Fu-tzu – has been deeply rooted in Chinese social thought. For many centuries its humanistic principles bore nourishing fruit in the daily life of China. Confucianism even extended its influence far beyond that ancient land's national boundaries.

  But then the mighty trade winds blew in from the Western world, bearing materialistic values that were tied to technological advantages. The long-enduring Confucian culture, with its high ethical standards based on kinship and friendship, could not compete economically or militarily. As it simply withered and nearly disappeared, exploitation and corruption plagued Chinese society. In the midst of a series of debilitating civil wars and foreign invasions, a political tidal wave was engulfing the mainland with its strong anti-religious and anti-Confucianist propaganda.

  As for the Western civilization that had altered China's destiny, Christianity had inspired and then dominated its philosophy, education, and literature for almost two millennia. Now it too has been overtaken: by the rising tide of science and technology. Religious beliefs were challenged during the Age of Enlightenment by ideas that promoted rationalism over spirituality. As God became outmoded, sentiment moved toward almost deifying the “scientific method.” Inductive and objective thinking have been elevated into unquestioning adherence, while deductive and subjective thinking are devalued and ridiculed. When this exclusionist coterie assumes the tone and posture of a cult, it becomes “scientism” – the worship of science.

  If science had triumphed over the notorious omnipresence of human immorality, individual and societal, during the four centuries since its rise to eminence, its worth would be well proven. Science has indeed brought us a golden age of technologies that have utterly transformed the planet's material culture. Civilized people – at least those sufficiently advantaged – currently conduct their daily lives, at home, at work, and at play in ways unimaginable to previous generations. Amazing and multiple are the products we utterly depend upon now for sustenance, for comfort and ease, for communicating with each other, and for transporting goods as well as ourselves.

  But where is the “soul” of our culture, our society? No longer does the citizenry seem to obey any moral code held in common, dictating what is good and therefore right to do between self and others, while also spelling out exactly what is wrong or evil and hence must not be done. In fact, society may not even possess anymore a collective or public conscience that gets replicated in each new generation of its members through moral training and education instilled during childhood.

  Worldwide, this “postmodern” age of ours is marked by deceit, violence, and greed in every walk of life. Relentless materialism reigns – this craving for desirable material goods and personal power in the mistaken notion that they will bring happiness. And along with that chimera goes the traffic in forbidden substances consumed to give one some transient and deceptive feeling of well-being, even of being godlike.

  But here no Garden of Eden is revisited. The ever-ascending crime rate accompanies moral decline in public and private behaviors. Children stalk and kill each other, and is it any wonder? For whether they are abused, indulged, or just ignored and allowed to drift by their parents and community, they are not learning from birth how to love one another: that is, how to treat some other human being as one hopes to be treated oneself. They cannot learn such basic moral lessons from the television screen, but instead are gradually desensitized to both cruelty and suffering. They are dumb witnesses to some coming Armageddon but do not know it.

  We are not safe in our streets, our schools, our places of work… even in our own homes. Insecurity, a feeling of being perpetually unsafe or under siege, has become a common disease. Is there a God who protects the good and smites the wicked? We cannot be at all sure nowadays.

  We cannot learn morals from a system that is amoral. It is amoral because it declines to set values and judgments upon behavior. All is relative; all acts harmful to others can be explained in terms of preceding data – removing any semblance of individual guilt, or any reason or right to impose either shame or punishment upon the offenders of moral codes. Sin begets crime, and crime begets sin, over and over in unending cycles that spiral downward toward a new vision of Hades. This happens because effective societal intervention at some early stage of hatching evil has not been possible or even allowed. God does not rule from on high, and all is not right with our world.

  In recent decades, the idea of “pursuit of happiness” has turned into a different pathway, seeking hedonistic and self-centered pleasure instead of ultimate spiritual bliss. This relentless materialism, by impoverishing people's souls, leads to the disintegration of both culture and society.

  The much-vaunted science has not yet invented a way to incorporate the teachings of ethical science into human beings. It is not as easy as splicing a microscopic chromosome to replace a faulty gene or injecting some preventative vaccine to rid humanity of its faults while instilling or bolstering virtues that contribute to the social good.

  Many people agree that our culture is diseased and our society imperiled, but they cannot concur on what caused these conditions. Nor have sure remedies been offered to cure the ills. Scholars like Mortimer J. Adler recommend a diet of prescriptive knowledge: a pedagogy that probes the great books of the past for both inspirational and practical ethical teachings.

  On the other hand, scholars like Bertrand Russell maintain that since no specific religion or ethical code is universal, such things are therefore not essential to society. In any case, these thinkers do not believe that the definite but differing footprints of spiritual beliefs and moral behavior, surviving in the great literature of other times and places, cannot be taken as objective knowledge – worth accepting as valuable truths for mankind to live by. This relativism implies that morality itself should have nothing to do with education.

  Moral relativism accompanied the rise of scientific knowledge. Its effect is to “reduce moral judgment to merely opinion,” and get rid of moral value of absolute right and wrong. 1 Obviously, this is a very dangerous move in terms of preserving a just and equitable society that allows each inhabitant certain basic human rights and a chance to fulfill his or her best human potential. Possessions and power over others often belong to those persons least capable of exercising a social conscience – in which moralistic thinking comprehends and lives by the simple formula of the Golden Rule.

  To correct the inevitable trend toward immorality, Mortimer Adler prescribed a basic principle of moral philosophy: “We ought to desire whatever is really good for us and nothing else.” 2 What is truly good for us is not necessarily how we first might envision it, superficially and selfishly. Only after obtaining the correct prescriptive knowledge and establishing moral judgment can we set high goals for ourselves and then work to make this earthly life of ours a meaningful endeavor.

  Since moral philosophy is a branch of knowledge, the proper way to obtain this knowledge is through the process of moral education. This instruction is scarcely new, for its role is traditional, virtually as old as human history. Its function is clearly seen in the realm of religious education, which takes place first in the setting of the family home. It then continues in the outer environment through a more formal schooling that teaches and enforces private and public ethics.

  It is obvious that any society which lacks a coherent system for this basic moral instruction for the inculcation of ethical precepts in the young, and its reinforcement through time, will become weakened and even diseased. It will be endangered both from within and without.

The project I have undertaken here looks at both the Chinese philosophical tradition and Christian religious teachings to determine whether they offer any certain way of rectifying individual as well as social problems. Within this context, I will search for evidence of “moral purification.” I use this term because it parallels traditional medicine's belief that the healing arts involve the process of purifying the human body, of cleansing or purging it of impure and toxic materials that cause disease and suffering.

  I shall restrict myself to dealing with the “soul healing” of both self and society. Therefore, I will not look at literal purification through hygienic or physical means, nor even ritual purification, whose rites may benefit the spirit while addressing the body. I will concentrate strictly on purification in moral or spiritual terms, viewing it as a pathway for first cultivating ethical thinking and behavior in one's own life and then applying them to society.

  Let me now define three key terms used in my study, before proceeding further. Etymologically, the word “ethical” is derived from the Greek ethika or ethikos, akin to ethos, which means character or custom. “Moral,” coming from the Latin mos or mores, generally carries a similar meaning: “a custom determined by usage, not by law.” 3

  According to Webster’s Dictionary, “ethical” means “a man’s normal state”; “having to do with ethics or morality; of or conforming to moral standards.” And “moral” means “pertaining to manners or morals”; “relating to, dealing with, or capable of making the distinction between, right and wrong in conduct.” As for purification, it is defined as “the act of purifying; the act or operating of separating and removing from anything that which is polluted or foreign to it”; “a cleansing from guilt of the pollution of sin.” 4

  It is my belief that despite all the scientific knowledge and technological inventions and advantages that have utterly transformed our material culture in the last two centuries, we should not abandon the ancient wisdom that comes down to us through the literature of the past. In fact, the more immersed we become with the evolving physical world, the more we urgently need to have beatific knowledge. In the future, such inspired wisdom could guide physical and social sciences, and the technologies that they have devised, in ways that will finally serve humanity’s virtues, and not expand its vices.

  Science is a great boon vouchsafed by the true Source of wisdom. Unfortunately, however, humans have misused empirical knowledged acquired from scientific investigation. Thinking it the only valid genre of knowledged, they may deny any imperative ethics and exalt themselves as the measure of everything in the universe. By freeing themselves from moral obligations and caring only for material gains, they have produced a bane on mankind’s divine destiny.

  I will venture the assertion that the future of civilization depends upon a system of moral purification that will transform the way human society provides for and maintains the moral education of its citizenry. The transmission of ideas as well as technology invariably changes society. Education has cardinal importance in transmitting either material or immaterial culture. Here, we are concerned foremost with immaterial culture, and with ethical and social values in particular.

  Superficially, Confucian teachings and Christian moral philosophy have many differences. For example, Confucianism has no concept of redemptive grace; its morality is based on the law of nature and on human effort. Christianity, in contrast, stresses a providential grace and spiritual rebirth that God foreordained to produce individual righteousness.

  Yet the two belief systems also have a common moral ground. Confucius teaches “not to do to others as you would not wish done to yourself.” 5 Also, someone “wishing to be established himself, seeks also to establish others; wishing to be enlarged himself, seeks also to enlarge others.” 6 The Christians’ guiding moral principle, the Golden Rule – “All things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them” 7 – conveys a similar message, both altruistic and pragmatic.

  In application, these concepts seem like the two sides of the same coin. All moral philosophy implies that there are standards of right and wrong. Therefore, if one errs or fails to honor one’s obligations to others, only repentance and purification will remove the pollution from wrongful deeds.

How have these basic moral teachings been conveyed to people through the centuries? The Chinese customarily have revered their literati – the authors of great works, whether profoundly philosophical or popular in appeal. The Confucianists particularly have used the ancient texts to provide new generations with moral instruction.

  The concept of purification is neither innovative nor unilateral. Indeed, it runs as an underlying theme through a number of works produced in both East and West. The Chinese philosophers and other writers discuss the idea of purification when presenting ways to cultivate ethical rules to live by. However, few works address the relationship of moral purification to educational theories and practices or that are concerned with investigating the spiritual components that can effectively shape and transform human conduct. This may be because Confucianism, the dominant philosophical school through the centuries, is basically anthropocentric. It focuses on human and societal issues, not spirituality.

  Confucianists have no notion of a Holy Spirit who imparts and infuses grace into human souls. Therefore, though some Confucianists may express a sense of divine inspiration or even guidance, their beliefs do not encompass the spiritual rebirth or purification known to Christian theologians and believers. They may recommend rites for seasonal religious purification but do not go beyond a bath or restricted diet. This makes a distinctive difference between the Chinese and Christian writers and philosophers when considering the implications of moral purification.

  In Western civilization during the past two millennia, Christianity was so closely woven into the culture and daily life of the people that one can scarcely draw a clear line between general education and religious didacticism. Its central text, of course, has been the Bible – notably the New Testament portion that deals with the life of Christ and then the potent and durable effects of his moral and spiritual teachings following His crucifixion. Until the Renaissance period beginning in the sixteenth century, most of the literature produced in the developing Western civilization revolved around Christian teachings. To study this literature without knowledge of and reference to the Bible and Christianity is senseless.

  In both East and West, wisdom and ethics traditionally have been considered inseparable. Philosophers saw little purpose in pursuing the first one without seeking the other as well. What was the purpose of attaining wisdom if it would not be applied to human conduct? Their texts, or their followers’ writings that preserved their ideas, show the connection between them. We should expect to find evidence of purification concepts within such literature. But we can also seek it elsewhere.

  Since literary entertainments – narrative poems, folk tales, novels, and dramas – were intended to instruct while pleasing audiences or readers, they naturally became another means for education in ethics because they popularized philosophical ideas and religious teachings. Therefore, we can look at such works of literature too, in both East and West, for the concept of moral purification.

  In the West, writers tended to become preoccupied with the origin, manifestations, and necessary expulsion of hamartia.

Aristotle asserts that the protagonist of a tragedy should be “a man who is not eminently good or just, yet whose misfortune is brought about not by vice or depravity, but by some error or frailty.” 8

In a literary sense, the Greek word means a “tragic flaw” – some great error or character frailty in a protagonist or antagonist. For instance, a hero exercises authority without responsibility, or a villain takes action without concern for morality. Because of it, the hero of a tragedy encounters misfortunes. The Occidental focus on this hamartia as a sinful condition that ultimately may require purging by God often skews literature in a religious direction more than an ethical one.

  In Western philosophy and literature, there are ample secondary sources in the terrain of moral purification to consult, along with the numerous historical studies of the Puritan period. Generally immersed in moral-purification principles, the English people in the seventeenth century revolted against a corrupt ruling class and fought a great war to overthrow the monarchy. They then established a controlled society, a protectorate to be guided by a theocracy made up of Puritans of various sects who in their own terms had already undergone moral purification. This rule, though short-lived, was an interesting political experiment.

Little scholarly investigation, however, has been done on the concept of purification and its effect on philosophy, religious teachings, and creative literature during the time leading up to the Puritan regime. In my research on Shakespearean literature, for example, I found to my surprise that purification is seemingly a path as yet untrodden by Shakespearean students. The main reason for this phenomenon might derive from the English Puritans' well-know disapproval of the fine arts, which they considered trivial at best. Yet they also recognized the arts’ potentially powerful influence: they could either reinforce those vices that required uprooting, or undermine the strict morality to which humans were now expected to adhere when seeking salvation.

  Because Puritans particularly disliked plays, judging pubic performances as an evil to be avoided even if they could not be altogether eradicated, scholars apparently assume that there was no connection at all between Puritanism and the popular Elizabethan dramatists. Yet I find abundant evidence that, coexisting in a cultural milieu hostile to the growing sect of Puritanism, the concept of moral purification had deeply penetrated into the writers’ thoughts and thence was manifested through their pens.

  Also, as Bertrand Russell noted, the Puritanism that ultimately met defeat in its British homeland enjoyed a resurgence, in both political and creative terms, on this side of the Atlantic, in the formation of what became the United States of America. Although it has long been fashionable for Americans to decry their culture’s Puritan roots, it is possible that much that has been good, and remains good, in American life and society actually derives from this sturdy moral foundation.

  The concept of moral purification, within the individual and in society itself, clearly needs further exploration and elucidation by other scholars. When probing the many areas of literary and philosophical expression throughout the literary annals of human history, surely they will find remarkable gems of wisdom to impart to us within our own morally troubled era.

Notes for the Introduction

1. Mortimer J. Adler, Ten Philosophical Mistakes. New York: Macmillan Publishing Co., 1987, pp. 108-127.

2. Adler, p. 125

3. Eric Partridge, Origins: A Short Etymological Dictionary of Modern English. New York: Greenwich House, 1983.

4. Webster's New Twentieth Century Dictionary. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1979.

5. Confucian Analects, XII:12.

6. Analects, VI:28.

7. Matthew 7:12.

8. C. Hugh Holman, A Handbook To Literature. Indianapolis: Odyssey Press, 1972, p. 247.

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.

Chapter 2

THE PROGRESSIVE APPROACH OF MORAL PURIFICATION

The Great Learning is a Confucian classic. Its authorship is attributed to Confucius’s grandson, Tze-ssu (492-432 B.C.). Its title comes from its opening sentence: “The Way of learning to be great.” The book instructs students in how to follow the path toward learning which it offered, so that they could achieve the goal of true wisdom in life.

  Actually, the book remained an obscure Confucian text until the eleventh century A.D., when Ch’an Buddhism threatened to overturn Confucianism’s popularity among the Chinese people. Mainly because of the need to combat the Ch’an Schools and to promote the traditional notion of virtue, distinguished scholars elevated The Great Learning to a new status and even built their own philosophies around it. Perhaps for the same reasons they also turned their attention to the ancient text of I Ching, or The Book of Changes -- especially to the commentaries about it provided by its editor, Confucius.

  It is widely acknowledged that Ch’an Buddhism amalgamated Mahayana Buddhism, Taoism (Lao-Tzu’s philosophy, not Taoism as a religion), and Confucianism. The new Confucian scholars, pragmatically following this fusion pattern, employed Taoism and Ch’an Buddhism as secondary ingredients in Confucianism, which resulted in a substream called Li-hsueh, or School of Principle. In the fifteenth century another substream appeared, known as School of Mind. These two schools were later collectively called Neo-Confucianism. However, all their philosopher-proponents essentially regarded themselves as Confucianist scholars.

Cultivation of Individual Virtue

  The Great Learning contains the basic philosophy of Confucianism. At the very beginning, it declares its theme: “What the Great Learning teaches, is -- to illustrate illustrious virtue; to renovate the people; and to rest in the highest excellence.” 1

  Thus the essential character of the book is established: it deals with education, and especially the process of cultivating virtue to form the “superior man.” Encouraging people to attain this high state of morality will assure the greatest good of the country. The aim fulfills the Confucian ideal. According to Ch’eng I-Ch’uan (1033-1107), “It was to learn the way of becoming a sage.” 2

  Because this method’s goal is great, it is called The Great Learning. The book lists this program to achieve it:

The ancients who wished to illustrate virtue throughout the kingdom, first ordered well their own States. Wishing to order well their States, they first regulated their families. Wishing to regulate their families, they first cultivated their persons. Wishing to cultivate their persons, they first rectified their hearts. Wishing to rectify their hearts, they first sought to be sincere in their thoughts. Wishing to be sincere in their thoughts, they first extended to the utmost their knowledge. Such extension of knowledge lay in the investigation of things [ko-whoa]. 3

  Here we can see a ripple effect. Virtue springs forth from a sincere mind, first to cultivate the deeds of a single person, then a family, afterward the state, and finally extending to the whole kingdom. (The word “sincere” in Chinese means earnest, honest, simple, pure; sincerity encompasses these qualities, along with conviction and singleheartedness.)

  But at the center or stem, the mind should be controlling human action. Then, what does ko-wu ( 格物 ) have to do with “sincere in thought”?

  The term ko-wu in the text could mean “investigate” (ko 格 ) “things” (wu 物 ). Yet, etymologically, ko could mean “ward off,” even “to combat,” wu could mean “things” or “materials”; thus ko-wu should be interpreted contextually as “purify the material [desires].” 4

  This concept of purification in some ways resembles that of the great English Renaissance scholar Sir Francis Bacon -- which will be discussed in a later chapter, when we compare the concepts of Confucian moralists with Biblical expressions and those of Elizabethan and Puritan authors.

  If Confucian Great Learning is the learning of the superior man, where then is the essential greatness? It is found in one’s mind, or in an attitude toward the universe. If one always looks at or thinks about oneself, the mind stays small. This kind of person is therefore small-minded -- an inferior man. On the other hand, if one looks continuously at humanity and thinks of its ultimate goodness, one’s vision is great, making the mind also grand. A great-minded man is a superior man. He is a man of Jen, of humanity.

  But how does one achieve this goal? The first step is to eliminate or “ward off” desires for material things, which distract and occupy the mind. Then one works to remove prejudices and see things clearly -- gaining the ability to discern right from wrong ( 格物致知 ).

  This is what Lao Tzu says of this endeavor:

To pursue learning is to increase [knowledge] daily.

To practice the Way is to decrease [desires] daily.

Decreasing and more decreasing,

One arrives at non-action [desireless]. 5

  This is to say, only after getting rid of this problem of double vision, then one can see clearly. Obtaining high knowledge comes only after single-focusing, within a state of desirelessness. Then, effortless action comes naturally. In Great Learning, it follows then that --

Their thoughts were sincere. Their thoughts being sincere, their hearts were then rectified. Their hearts being rectified, their persons were cultivated…. Their families being regulated… their States being rightly governed, the whole kingdom was made tranquil and happy ( 意誠，心正，身修，家齊，國治，天下平 ). 6

  In this progressive, comprehensive ideal of “Great Learning,” we can see a philosophy of education that heavily emphasizes self-cultivation. Only after a person’s mind is purified of selfish, evil or of incorrect will, and knowledge or morality is balanced with utility, can one set out on the royal highway of the highest good for humankind. This means that one’s will, mind, and heart are in tune with the Absolute Soul, or near to it, transcending the narrow self. This is akin to a Neo-Confucian concept of establishing a Mind for Heaven and Earth.

The Value of Sincerity

  To start with the infinite and eternal task of Great Learning, the key acquisition is sincerity. The quality should not be treated here as a general term. In another Confucian classic attributed to Tzu-ssu, The Doctrine of the Mean, sincerity is almost a state of mind.

Sincerity is the way of Heaven. The attainment of sincerity is the way of men. He who possesses sincerity, is he who, without an effort, hits what is right, and apprehends, without the exercise of thought; -- he is the sage who naturally and easily embodies of the right way. He who attains to sincerity, is he who chooses what is good, and firmly holds it fast. 7

  The concept of sincerity ( 誠 ) to Confucianists is neither attitudinal, in the way Buddhists use it, nor equivalent to Buddhist enlightenment. It is more like “the pure in heart” in the Beatitudes of Jesus. It is unique and dynamic.

Buddhist thinking, though it seems intriguing and mysterious in metaphysics, when touching upon real life, inevitably becomes hollow and broken down. But as to the “sincerity” in The Doctrine of the Mean, it is not so. If one says that the Buddhist concept of “emptiness” has the effect of purifying karma, then the concept of “sincerity” is far beyond “emptiness” in its positiveness and effectiveness. 8

  During the course of Chinese intellectual history, this concept of sincerity changed. When responding to the challenge of Buddhism, the Neo-Confucianists divided the function of sincerity into two sections: (1) in personal cultivation, use “Ching” ( 敬 reverence and seriousness); (2) in acquiring knowledge, follow the principle of investigation ( 格物 ). 9

Wang Yang-Ming (1472-1529), the great Neo-Confucian philosopher of the Ming dynasty, emphasizes the unity of knowledge and action. He talks about the eight steps in The Great Learning in this way:

While each of them has its own place, they are really one thing. Investigating, extending, being sincere, rectifying, and cultivating are the task performed in the procedure [for the highest good]. Although each has its own name, they are really one affair. 10

  If we judge only by this statement, it appears that Wang denies that steps must be taken to achieve the highest good. But it is not so, because this concept of progress applies only to the ideal of superior men. In practice, even if one advances to the position of governing a state, it is still possible that one may have unwanted desires that need to be banished or purified. Nevertheless, the primary object is to have sincerity:

If one sincerely loves the good known by the innate faculty but does not in reality do the good as we come into contact with the thing to which the will is directed, it means that the thing has not been investigated and that the will to love the good is not yet sincere. 11

  Sincerity is crucial: it can translate a belief into action, and knowledge into practice. In this context, it takes another etymological meaning, equal to actualizing. “If sincerity is within, it will be manifested without.” 12 This means that sincerity has the power to perform. Therefore, “It is only he who is possessed of the most complete sincerity that exists under heaven, who can transform.” 13 Because sincerity is such a critical factor in building great morality, one must examine oneself constantly.

It is said in the Book of Poetry [i.e., Canon of Odes] “Although the fish sink and lie at the bottom, it is quite clearly seen.” Therefore the superior man examines his heart, that there may be nothing wrong there, and that he may have no cause for dissatisfaction with himself. That wherein the superior man cannot be equalled is simply this -- his work [of self-examining and purifying] which other men cannot see. 14

  Just as the foundation is to a building, or root and sap are to a plant, what cannot be seen is quintessential to the visible. That “which other men cannot see” is the purifying of will within the superior man; its result is promoted and preserved in sincerity.

Sincerity, when it is applied on knowledge, is diligent in learning; when applied on humanity, is keen in practicing; when applied on courage, it shuns from dishonour. So, all of these virtues spring from sincerity…. All religion, politics and ethics hang on this one pivot of sincerity. 15

  Wang Yang-Ming says:

A sincere will is in accord with the Principle of Nature…. At the same time it is not attached in the least to selfish thought…. Knowing this, you know the state of equilibrium before feelings are aroused. 16

In this case, Wang regards perpetual sincerity as the state of equilibrium without attachment. Furthermore, he regards what the Buddhists claim to be enlightenment as merely escape from human responsibilities. He clearly ridicules it. To him the very thought and practice is rank selfishness, and thus subject to purification.

Only this “sincerity” enables us to build up the other-me relationship to unite knowledge and action, to produce the actualizing power of all virtues and it will not become empty words. 17

  Sincerity begets real belief, and then goes forth to realize what one believes. It is not self-deceptive, nor is it an escape from the real world and human relationships. At the heart of human problems is the condition of the human heart. Sincerity, then, might be the simple way out; at least, it is the starting point on the right way to reform.

  To work toward reforming something, one must have a conceptual Form, if we could use Plato’s term, as model. The Chinese Confucian philosophers provided two forms: an individual should aim to be a superior man, and society should aim to achieve the Great Harmony.

  The Confucian plan for promoting “illustrious virtue throughout the kingdom,” usually known as “great harmony,” often seems no more than persistent wishful thinking. Nonetheless, during the course of history, sincerity remains a basic virtue to the Chinese. We are all expected to possess it, and our expectations of a positive human future rely upon it -- if indeed we happen to believe humankind has a future, in one way or another.

“KO”: Changing is Purging in Social Structure

  I Ching, or The Book of Changes, is the oldest book among Confucian classics. Its authorship is attributed to the ancient sage, King Wen of Chou. Confucius, intrigued with it, served as a notable editor and commentator.

  The book presents eight elements, which originally symbolized letters, combined into 64 hexagrams. It is believed that these hexagrams contain messages that will enable one to understand things or even determine future events, if they are correctly interpreted. Each hexagram has six lines. A line may be either unbroken or broken. An unbroken line is called yang; a broken line, yin. Yang symbolizes positive, superior, masculine, strong, creative, etc.; yin, negative, inferior, feminine, weak, receptive, etc.

  In the cultural history of Chinese feudalism, a well was the source of water supply, and people built a community around it. Therefore, the word or image of “well” can also symbolize society. 18 Thus, saying someone is “leaving his well behind him” means that he is leaving his homeland.

  Since human beings are susceptible to corruption, vices, and follies of all kinds, changes are needed if a state of purity is to be achieved. This is as true for a government or society as it is for a person.

  For persons, the means for purification is education. In I Ching, the hexagram Meng ( 蒙 ), when “the young fool [ignorant] 19 seeks me,” opportunity and potentiality meet. “To make a fool [ignorant] develop / It furthers one to apply discipline. / The fetters [follies] should be removed.” 20 This is moral purification applied to an individual child: to rebuke, to correct, even physically chastise if necessary, in order to make a docile disciple.

  With a government, the hexagram takes up the symbol of Ting ( 鼎 ), the Caldron, a Tripod; “Nothing transforms things so much as the Ting.” As a cooking utensil, a Ting, transforms raw meat into cooked dishes, so should government transform and cultivate its people. After a while, however, accumulated food left inside the Ting gets corrupted. In the same way, social establishments tend to become stagnant.

  So purification is needed. The way to do it is to overturn that political system: “A Ting with legs upturned / Furthers removal of stagnating stuff.” 21 Then a new governmental system can be established.

  Yet another type of change is possible: social change. It is symbolized by the 49^th hexagram, Ko. fundamental and widescale, therefore harder -- and most important.

The setup of a well must necessarily be revolutionized in the course of time. Hence there follows the hexagram of REVOLUTION. REVOLUTION means removal of that which is antiquated. 22

  Unlike the hexagram Meng, a society ( 井 ) cannot be chastised. Because “The town may be changed, / But the well cannot be changed.” 23 A well by its very nature is immov