Confucian Discourse and Chu Hsi's Ascendancy
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
CONFUCIAN DISCOURSE AND CHU HSI'S ASCENDANCY Confucian Discourse and Chu Hsi's Ascendancy HOYT CLEVELAND TILLMAN MJ University of Hawaii Press Honolulu © 1992. University of Hawaii Press All rights reserved Printed in the United States ofAmerica 97 96 95 94 93 92. 5432.1 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Tillman, Hoyt Cleveland. Confucian discourse and Chu Hsi's ascendancy / Hoyt Cleveland Tillman. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references (p. ) and index. ISBN 0-8248-1416-9 1. Philosophy, Confucian-History. 2. Confucianism-History. 3. Chu, Hsi, 1130-1200. 4. China-Intellectuallife-960-1644. I. Title. B127.C65TS5 1992 92-9630 CIP University of Hawaii Press Books are printed on acid-free paper and meet the guidelines for permanence and durability ofthe Council on Library Resources FOR MY FATHER WILLIAM FRED TILLMAN AND IN REMEMBRANCE OF MY MOTHER REBA ELIZABETH WILBANKS TILLMAN (1916-1990) AND MY MOTHER BY MARRIA<:;;E MARGARITA WEN-HWEI SOO MIH (1908-1987) CONTENTS Foreword by Ying-shih Yii IX Acknowledgments Xlll Introduction 1 PAR T 1 . THE FIR 5 T PER I 0 D, 1 1 2 7 - 1 1 6 2 19 1. The First Generation: Chang Chiu-ch'eng and Hu Hung 24 Chang Chiu-Ch'eng 24 &&~ ~ PAR T 2. THE 5 ECON D PER I 0 D, 1 1 63- 1 181 37 2. Chang Shih 43 3. Chu Hsi and Chang Shih 59 On Self-cultivation, Equilibrium, and Harmony 59 Discourse with Hu's Text 64 On Humaneness 70 4. iii Tsu-ch'ien 83 5. Chu Hsi and iii Tsu-ch'ien 104 Sociopolitical Issues 106 Academies and Educational Issues 108 Reconstructing the Tao-hsiieh Tradition II4 Philosophical Issues II9 VIII CONTENTS PAR T 3 . THE T H I R 0 PER I 0 0, 1 1 82- 1 202 133 6. Ch'en Liang 145 7. Chu Hsi and Ch'en Liang 161 On Governance 164 On Expediency and Utility 168 The Tao and History 178 8. Lu Chiu-yuan 187 9. Chu Hsi and Lu Chiu-yuan 202 Pedagogy and Reading the Classics 2II Debate over the Ultimate 216 Tao, Opinions, and the Question ojChu's Authority 222 PAR T 4. THE F0 URTH PER I 0 0, 1 202 - 1 279 231 10. Chu Hsi's Disciples and Other Tao-hsueh Confucians 235 Conclusion 251 ~otes 265 Glossary 291 Pre-1900 Chinese Sources 297 Twentieth-Century Chinese and Japanese Sources 302 Western-Language Sources 3II fu&x 3~ FOREWORD Over the past three decades, tremendous progress has been made in the West in the study of Confucianism. Today very few of us would subscribe to the crude but once dominant notion that Confucianism was no more than a political ideology that functioned to legitimate imperial authority. Viewing Confucianism in this way is almost as absurd as suggest ing that the central significance of medieval Christianity consisted in its jus tification of the divine right of the king. Nor would we feel as confident as we once did to define Confucianism in late imperial China exclusively in terms ofthe examination system simply because Chu Hsi's commentaries on the Four Books had been established as the standard text for state examina tions since 1315. Instead, in the West today we are more inclined to see Con fucianism as a way of life involving faith and spiritual values. Needless to say, this new understanding would not have been possible without the recent rapid growth of Chinese intellectual history as a field ofstudy. Most, however, if not all of the recent studies on post-Tang Confucian ism are of a monographic nature focusing either on a particular thinker or on a specific aspect of thought. The result is that we see many individual trees but not the forest. The present study by Professor Hoyt Tillman is therefore a most welcome and timely contribution which serves to supple ment as well as complement the one-sidedness of current approaches. Tillman interprets the history of Confucianism during the Southern Sung \ primarily as a development from diversity to orthodoxy. This interpretation is amply supported by the written records of the period. In order to show X FOREWORD the diversity of Confucianism throughout the twelfth century, Tillman has chosen, quite ingeniously, I would say, to treat Chu Hsi not as a single phi losopher in isolation but "in the context of his relationships and inter changes with his major contemporaries." Thus while nowhere is a chapter to be found dealing exclusively with his thought and scholarship, Chu Hsi is nevertheless everywhere in the book. In this way not only is the intellectual world of twelfth-century China more objectively represented, but Chu Hsi's contemporaries and intellectual rivals are also accorded a greater historical justice. Indeed, in terms of what Tillman calls "the three key levels of Con fucian discourse," the Way (Tao) as generally conceived by Confucians in the twelfth century was by no means confined to speculative philosophy; it concerned cultural values and state policies as well. Only by freeing our selves from the narrow "orthodox" conception of Tao-hsueh ("Learning of the Way") as established in the official Sung History can we see that Lu Tsu ch'ien, Ch'en Liang, Lu Chiu-yuan, and Yeh Shih were also, along with Chu Hsi, promoting Confucianism as a way oflife each in his own way. With regard to the notion of Confucian orthodoxy, a distinction of vital :' importance must be made between state orthodoxy and intellectual ortho doxy. Chu Hsi's branch of Tao hsueh was officially recognized as orthodoxy in 1241, but this orthodoxy had never been universally accepted by Confu cians of different persuasions throughout the late imperial age. As a matter of fact, the orthodoxy of Chu Hsi's Learning of the Way was no sooner politically established than it became intellectually questioned. In the mid dle of the Ch'un-yu reign, (1241-1252), only a few years after the imperial proclamation recognizing the Ch'eng-Chu school as orthodoxy, a private scholar named T'ang Chung had already initiated a movement to reconcile the doctrinal differences between Chu Hsi and Lu Chiu-yuan, a movement that continued well into the fourteenth century and culminated in Kung T'ing-sung's compilation, in 1322, of The Convergences of Views of Chu and Lu on the Four Books (Ssu-shu Chu-Lu hui-t'ung). Little wonder that Wu Ch'eng (1249-1333), the most prominent early Yuan Confucian of the Chu Hsi tradition, also found it necessary to involve Lu's idea of "honoring the moral nature" as a corrective to Chu's intellectual approach to the Con fucian way. In my biased view, in the intellectual history of late imperial China we are more justified to speak of the Ch'eng-Chu school as the main stream of Confucian learning than as orthodoxy in a strict and clearly defined sense. The reason is not far to seek. Confucianism was not an orga nized religion with a centralized authority serving as the arbiter of faith whose decrees were binding on all Confucians. Professor Tillman's concept of "Confucian fellowship" serves the purpose "- of his book very well. He defines this fellowship as "a network of social rela tions and a sense of community with a shared tradition that was distinct from other Confucians ofthe era." It seems to me that "fellowship" is vividly FO RE WORn XI descriptive of the various Confucian groups formed around a few masters in the twelfth century such as Chu Hsi in Fukien, Lu Chiu-yiian in Kiangsi, Chang Shih in Hunan, and Lii Tsu-ch'ien in Chekiang. Despite their doctri nal and pedagogical differences, however, all these groups may be regarded as Tao-hsueh communities for the simple reason that they were apparently formed for a common purpose: to study and promote the Confucian way. At least, this is how Chu Hsi sometimes understood the term Tao-hsueh, and he could not possibly have foreseen that forty years after his death his own version of Confucian learning was to be identified with Tao-hsueh exclusively. It would be anachronistic on our part today if we continue to v follow the biased interpretation of the official Sung History, thereby equat ing Tao-hsueh only with the Ch'eng-Chu school. "Confucian fellowship" is a wholly new concept capturing the essence of the Tao-hsueh community, which must be understood as a new social and cultural phenomenon in Sung China. The earliest Tao-hsueh communities emerged in the eleventh century, notably the Kuan-chung group under the leadership of Chang Tsai and the Loyang group centered around the two Ch'eng brothers. But no such Confucian groups can be found in T'ang times. Han Yii's, for example, was a circle of poets and writers rather than Confucian believers even though he was generally acknowledged by Sung Neo-Confucians as the most important precursor of the Tao-hsueh move ment. From a historical point of view, the emergence of the Tao-hsueh com- v munity in Sung China may be most fruitfully seen as a result of seculariza tion. There is much evidence suggesting that the Tao-hsueh community was, in important ways, modeled on the Ch'an monastic community. The Neo-Confucian academy, from structure to spirit, bears a remarkable fam- ily resemblance to the Ch'an monastery. But the difference is substantial and important. Gradually, quietly, but irreversibly, Chinese society was taking a \/ this-worldly turn with Ch'an masters being replaced by Confucian teachers as spiritual leaders.