sign in sign up
<<
Home , Book of Rites, Zuo Zhuan

Chapter 3 The Notion of “Ritual Propriety” in Early Daoism

“Ritual propriety” (禮 ) was one of the most prominent discussion topics in pre-Qin philosophy. The notion did not only indicate, as it does today, formal- ized polite behavior, but in a broader sense it referred to the standardized codes and ethical norms of the clan-based feudal society of the time.1 This chapter turns to the ideas and value systems that constituted the background of these codes and discusses in greater detail Daoism’s, especially Laozi’s, reverence and concern for ritual propriety that was outlined in the general introduction in Chapter 1. The time around the transition from the Spring and Autumn to the (770–476 BCE to 475–221 BCE) was an age of decay in which the various philosophical schools rose up to find solutions to the multiple problems of their era. Li, or ritual propriety, thus became a topic of greatest importance. Later scholars usually assume that Confucians and Daoists rep- resent two diametrically opposed perspectives on the culture of ritual in the classical age. However, when one engages in further reflection on this issue, it becomes clearer that it is far too simple and even misleading to conceive of and Daoism in terms of two contradictory philosophies of culture. As we have already seen, Pre-Qin Daoism can be divided into the three schools of Laozi, Zhuangzi, and Huang-Lao Daoism. Among these schools, the School of Zhuangzi is indeed the most opposed to the Confucian views of ritual propriety. But Laozi, a contemporary of , does not share this

* The earlier form of this chapter was an essay translated with the help of an English transla- tion made available by the author and prepared by Helga Lasschuijt and the organizers of a conference on Ritual and Philosophy in China: Confucian Rituality and Taoist Liturgy in Theory and Practice at the International Institute for Asian Studies at Leiden University, 27–28 May 1999. The draft was completed on May 9, 1999, and revised in August 1999. It was later pub- lished in Hanxue Yanjiu 漢學研究 (Sinological Research), 18:1 (June 2005), edited by the Taipei Center for Chinese Studies. 1 The term li for “ritual propriety” is often mentioned in Pre-Qin philosophical texts: “Governing and measuring are to be found in ritual propriety (, Zhongni Yan Ju Chapter, 28.7); “Ritual propriety rules the country, stabilizes society, and orders the people” (, 11th Year of Duke Yin, 2); “Ritual propriety does not apply to the people below” (Book of Rites, Qu Li Chapter, 1.68); and “Because of ritual propriety … there is ranking of the noble and the base, differences between the old and the young; and the poor and the rich, unimportant and important all have their appellations” (, Li Lun Chapter, 19.3).

© koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2018 | doi 10.1163/9789004361980_005 62 Chapter 3 opposition, and when it comes to the Huang-Lao Daoists of the later Warring States (475–221 BCE), an obvious amalgamation of views takes place. In short, Daoism developed in different ways at different times, and “adaptation” (時變 shibian) has undeniably been one of its most distinctive features.2 Reflections on ritual regulation varied among the different strands of Pre-Qin Daoism and therefore the Daoist perspective on li should by no means be regarded in any way as uniform or static; rather, from the times of Laozi to Zhuangzi, and then onto the Huang-Lao Daoists of the Jixia Academy, Daoist ritual philosophy was steadily broadened. What follows is a detailed account of the respective posi- tions on ritual of these three types of Daoism.

Laozi’s Notion of Ritual Propriety

As a court historian, Laozi had to be deeply acquainted with ritual propri- ety by profession. That Confucius consulted Laozi about ritual is not only prominently recorded in the Records of the Historian, but in many other Pre- Qin sources.3 Particularly concrete information is found in the Zeng Zi Wen, Questions of Zengzi, Chapter of the Book of Rites that contains four detailed accounts of Confucius inquiring with Laozi about the proper procedure for fu- neral rituals. In the Laozi, two chapters (31, 38) explicitly mention ritual propri- ety. In the Zeng Zi Wen Chapter, Confucius consults Laozi on the ceremonial aspects of ritual propriety. In the Laozi, however, Laozi4 is not concerned with the ceremonial details, but rather with the political aspects of ritual propriety. Although ritual propriety is not often considered by Laozi, the notion has specific philosophical characteristics for him and deeply reflects the troubles of the times. Chapter 31 of the Laozi is about funeral rites. Again, Laozi is not so

2 In his essay “On the Essentials of the Six Schools” (Shiji, Chapter 130.10), Sima Tan frequently points out that the capability of adapting to the specific circumstances of the time was char- acteristic for Daoism. 3 In the Zhuangzi, the Tian Di (Heaven and Earth), Tian Dao (Way of Heaven), Tian Yun (The Turnings of Heaven), Tian Zi Fang (Master at Plowing Straight Fields), and Bei You (Knowinghood Journeyed North) Chapters contain records of Confucius discussing ques- tions of benevolence, ritual propriety, righteousness, and Dao with Laozi. The Dang Ran, Appropriate Dyes, Chapter in the Lüshi Chunqiu says “Confucius studied with Laozi.” (9.7). 4 The book of Laozi was written by Laozi (Lao Dan). I agree with ’s account in the Records of the Historian (Chapter 63) on this point. Other Pre-Qin texts, such as the Zhuangzi, the Xunzi, and the Lüshi Chunqiu, support this supposition. For details see Chen Guying, Laozi Zhu Jin Yi Qi Pingjie 老子今註今譯及其評介 (Laozi. A New Commentary, Translation, and Critical Assessment) Taibei: Shangwu, 1997.