Profound Learning and the rise of principle (li) (supplement to chapter 6) Table of contents 1. Additional text 2. Additional images 3. Notes https://bloomsbury.com/uk/confucianism-in-china-9781474242431/ © Tony Swain (2017) Confucianism in China, Bloomsbury Academic, an imprint of Bloomsbury Publishing PLC 1. Additional text In chapter 6, I provided only a very brief summary of events between the end of the Han and the beginning of the Tang dynasty. As Ru tradition certainly endured throughout these four centuries, this cursory treatment perhaps requires some comment. My decision to skim over this period was largely pragmatic. To keep the book to a length deemed appropriate for an introduction, some things had to go. To make space for further discussion of the Period of Disunion, I would have had to compress material in other sections. An introduction to the massive history of Chinese Ruism can easily fall into the trap of listing endless inventories of names with insufficient information on anyone. This would not be helpful to readers trying to grasp the primary contours of a tradition. Some very important intellectual developments nonetheless did occur during the Period of Division, although they were not subsequently acknowledged as being integral to the ongoing transmission in the Way the Ru. As my concern has been to develop a history which especially allows readers to understand the modern vicissitudes of Ruism, I was willing to allow the traditional prejudice that this was something of a ‘dark age’. Revivalists of the Song-Ming sought to forge a link back to the sages of the late Zhou (Kongzi, Zengzi, Zisi, Mengzi), some of the Qing instead strived to reconnect with the Han (especially Dong Zhongshu), and both of these eras are being reclaimed by modern revivalist trying to resuscitate Ruism. But no-one identifies Ru from the Period of Disunion (or, for that matter, from most of the Tang) as being worth salvaging. In this supplement, I will look at some vital philosophical innovations that, nonetheless, occurred during the Period of Disunion. In particular, this was a time when the concept of li or principle was promoted to become a crucial philosophical concept. This, needless to say, was a very important prelude to the Ru school of Principle Learning, the main subject of chapter 6. Although the events I am about to relate would chronologically appear at the beginning of the chapter, you might find it more beneficial to wait until you have competed chapter 6 before reading this supplement. In that way, you will be better able to recognize the potential in ideas that are here still in a germinal phase. The reason the thinkers we are about to meet were traditionally overlooked quickly becomes apparent: they were not actually presenting their ideas within the confines of Ru https://bloomsbury.com/uk/confucianism-in-china-9781474242431/ © Tony Swain (2017) Confucianism in China, Bloomsbury Academic, an imprint of Bloomsbury Publishing PLC tradition. This is another occasion when ‘Confucianism’ can cause problems, for while they were definitely distancing themselves from the Ru, they were simultaneously trying to reclaim Kongzi as their own. They were not espousing the Way of the Ru, but they were, after a fashion, ‘Confucian’. To add to the terminological tangle, these individuals have in English been branded ‘Neo-Daoists’. They indeed were drawn to texts that are fundamental to Daoist philosophy and some were even interested in the quest for longevity and immortality. But they did not think of themselves as Daoists and nor should we. Rather they were exponents of Xuanxue. This literally means Dark Learning but ‘dark’ here connotes things which are difficult to perceive and hence ‘mysterious’. Abstruse Learning is one common translation. As this alludes to the abstruse metaphysical foundations of existence, however, it also suggest ‘profound’ and so I will follow those who translate Xuanxue as Profound Learning, that is, the study of and inquiry into the Profound. Wang Bi, who we will meet in a moment, explained it thus: “The term ‘mysterious’ (xuan) is derived from the fact that it is that which emerges from the secret and the dark. The term ‘profound’ (shen) is derived from the fact that you might try to plumb to the bottom of it but can never reach that far.”i Perhaps, after all, we should consider this the “dark age” of Ruism; not an eclipse, but rather a era when the transformations were shadowy, abstruse, yet for all that profoundly important. Profound Learning emerged from the events leading up to and following the collapse of the Han dynasty. These were trouble times of political crisis and foreign invasion, constant warfare, epidemics, and famine; life expectancy was short and there was massive population decline (official sources suggest by 70 percent, although this is probably and exaggeration).ii In the late Han, the court had been controlled by corrupt and powerful eunuchs and some literati had engaged in ‘pure criticism’ (qingyi) to challenge this situation. They were harshly suppressed. Thereafter, thoughtful individuals withdrew and instead channeled their energy into safer and more private varieties of dialogue known as ‘pure talk’ or ‘pure conversation’ (qingtan). This was a kind of intellectual sparing in which debaters would display their intellectual prowess. These were privileged men (and in some cases women) who would assemble to socialize, discuss fashionable philosophical topics, enjoy music, dine and drink excessively. Profound Learning emerged in this context and it became the dominant orientation of Pure Talk. https://bloomsbury.com/uk/confucianism-in-china-9781474242431/ © Tony Swain (2017) Confucianism in China, Bloomsbury Academic, an imprint of Bloomsbury Publishing PLC On the whole, exponents of Profound Learning simply sidestepped Ru Learning. Both Xuanxue and Ruxue (along with literature and history) were part of the curriculum of the Imperial Academy at this time and exponents of Profound Learning were themselves quite conversant with the Classics. Most were not overtly criticizing Ruism so much as brushing it aside as incidental. The real wisdom of the sages, they believed, went much deeper. The three texts at the core of Profound Learning were the Daodejing (Classic of the Way and Virtue), Zhuangzi and Yijing (Classic of Changes), known as the ‘Three Profound [Classics]’ or sanxuan. They were valued as the premier texts for probing the metaphysical foundation of the Way (dao). This was something Ru Learning had failed to elucidate, which explained why it had been impotent in solving the problems of the late Han. The unexpected twist was, these philosophers claimed Kongzi as their supreme champion. The alleged authors of the Three Profound Classics were Laozi, Zhuangzi and Kongzi (to whom the ‘Wings’ to the Changes were attributed). The fact that Kongzi of the Analects seemed totally adverse to metaphysical speculation was taken to signify that he alone fully appreciated that the Way is ultimately beyond words. Laozi and Zhuangzi approached very close to the Way, but only Kongzi had completely grasped it. As far as we know, it was Wang Bi who first turned the tables to make Kongzi a sage embodying unspeakable truth,iii although it was reiterated by many others. Why did they feel the need to reinvent the Master? The obvious answer is that by so doing they could maintain they were not presenting a school of thought directly rivaling Ruism so much as subsuming the Way of the Ru under a more comprehensive philosophical horizon. The socio- political ramifications of this shift were, nonetheless, radically innovative. Wang Bi was the most important exponent of Profound Learning and his thought must be understood in terms of the political transitions unfolding in the wake of the Han. After the collapse of that dynasty, the most powerful kingdom was the Wei, centered in the Yellow River region of the north of China and founded by general Cao Cao (155-220), although it was his son who actually assumed the throne. The Cao rulers patronized philosophers to bolster their new regime. He Yan (c.195-249) was the son of one of Cao Cao’s concubines who gained a reputation for feigning the beauty of a ‘floating flower’ and pursuing the life of a libertine. He wrote a commentary on the Daodejing, now lost, and another on the Analects which remained authoritative until Zhu Xi’s commentary eventually https://bloomsbury.com/uk/confucianism-in-china-9781474242431/ © Tony Swain (2017) Confucianism in China, Bloomsbury Academic, an imprint of Bloomsbury Publishing PLC took take pride of place.iv He saw no tension between these books and maintained Laozi was “in agreement with the sages”.v He Yan was eventually given an official position at the court and in that capacity he recommended his friends for appointment. Amongst them was Wang Bi, the most precocious and abrasive genius of the day. As He Yan himself admitted the superiority of Wang’s philosophy, I will here skip over He’s thought.vi Wang Bi’s philosophy was formed in the brief window of time during which Cao rulers were struggling to consolidate their regime. For them, orthodox Ru were of little use. They were seen as pedestrian bureaucrats who wrote endless commentaries and sought to save the world by squabbling over linguistic minutiae. Even mid-Han, Liu Xin had quipped that Ru could write thirty thousand words explaining just five words in a Classic and a little later Ban Gu mentioned there were over a thousand scholars writing commentaries each capable of exceeding a million words.vii The Caos did not require the services of Ru struggling to match ‘name and actuality’; they were instead desperate for raw talent and inspired genius. Gatherings of Pure Conversation could be a better place to spot brilliance than an Imperial Academy.