The Philosophy of Qi: The Record of Great Doubts

Partiality in the Learning of the Song Confucians

An ancient person said: “Frequently people do not realize that they are blinded by their own desires. There are indeed not a few people who are deluded by knowledge acquired from the senses.”¹¹⁹ In my humble opinion, from ancient times people have often been deluded [by sense knowledge]. Since the end of the Song, the number of prejudiced scholars who were deluded by sense knowledge and were not enlightened have been even more numerous. It is a problem on which scholars ought to reflect.

Following the end of the Song, Confucian scholarship was too focused on details, and, being verbose and rambling, it was confusing and overly intricate. Compared to the age of Confucius and Mencius, it is probably ten times or one hundred times more elaborate. The current [of elaborate scholarship] flows on, encompassing everything without limit, and we don’t know where it will stop. Because there are scholars who cannot preserve what is brief and to the point, they have only wide knowledge without substantial results. To what is this due? Since the Song, scholarship has increased gradually in detail, disregarding the root and following the branches, being excessively analytical and incoherent. Isn’t it because sound methods have been completely abandoned? Yet later Confucians continue to imitate those excesses. Consequently true virtue has disappeared.

Someone asked: “Can we rely completely on the words of the Cheng brothers and Zhu Xi? Moreover, is there any room to harbor doubts?” To this I answer that the words of the sages should, of course, be trusted for many generations. Next, the words of worthies should also be seen as models. However, words and deeds have a mutual relationship. If worthies are mistaken in their actions, one can also expect prejudice and partiality in their knowledge. It then follows that even in their theories and their scholarship, there are probably flaws such as bias and deficiencies of excess or omission. This fact is a natural dividing line between sages and worthies. When one’s learning lacks prejudices and partiality, one approximates sagehood. From my point of view, the Cheng brothers and Zhu Xi are wise philosophers. Since Mencius, only a few people¹²⁰ can be regarded as knowing the Way. However, since we can’t go so far as to say they are sages, their philosophy also is probably not equal to that of the sages. The theories of the Cheng brothers and Zhu Xi ought not to be taken lightly by later scholars. Even given that, we must have a discriminating attitude.

Mencius says, “If one believed everything in the Book of History, it would have been better for the book not to have existed at all. In the Wu cheng chapter I accept only two or three passages.”¹²¹ We should believe these words. The works of the Cheng brothers and Zhu Xi are very verbose, and, if we never doubt their words at all, we will come to accept these works completely. With regard to their theories, people nowadays bend and apologize; since they are primarily swayed by their own private opinions, they succumb to their own prejudices. They can’t be regarded as impartial. I am a simple, ordinary person and am unable to be a loyal follower of the Cheng brothers and Zhu Xi. I do not indulge in flattery. On the other hand, as long as I don’t indulge my own preferences, I am able to be faithful to the thinking of the Cheng brothers and Zhu Xi.

King Wu of the Zhou and his brother, the duke of Zhou,¹²² were sages. Leading the way with the feudal lords and the princes, they subjugated the tyrant Zhou,¹²³ but I have never heard that people condemned that. Why did Boyi and Shuqi disapprove of King Wu?¹²⁴ This was because they could not comprehend the exercise of authority by the sage-king [in accordance with particular situations] even though they were praiseworthy for their independent views and unique conduct. However, their purity [of motivation] was indeed sagelike.¹²⁵ But their strong points revealed the partiality of their nature. Although they had great wisdom, they also had bias. The same thing can be said of the learning of several teachers of the Song. In the learning of the Song Confucians, the line of the Way is clear and correct, and, as their character and conduct were conscientious, they were among the genuine Confucians to have appeared since Mencius. But their theories are overly detailed and suffer from being too analytical. In this respect, they differ from the holistic theories of Confucius and Mencius. For example, at the end of the Zhou, external form overcame [internal] substance,¹²⁶ and this resulted in many scholars’ promoting biased doctrines. The learning in the Song was increasingly biased, and there were many instances of teachings contrary to the sages.

Reverence Within and Rightness Without

Cheng Hao said, “In the learning of the Buddhists there is reverence to straighten the internal life but no rightness to square the external life.”¹²⁷ I still can’t understand these words. Buddhism has its own logic of substance and function. Buddhists take “emptiness and tranquility”¹²⁸ as substance and “no place to abide”¹²⁹ as function. Thus one cannot expect that the Buddhists’ substance is using reverence to reform one’s interior life. If the Buddhists have such a substance as reverence within, then they certainly have the function of correcting one’s exterior by rightness. Then why must the Buddhists degenerate so much as to dispense with basic human relations? I cannot understand what Cheng Hao meant. The reason later Confucians tried in vain to explain this was simply because of their adulation of the Cheng brothers.

In the time of Yao and Shun, through the three ages of Xia, Shang, and Zhou, there were many among the lords and retainers who spoke of reverence, but there were few who spoke of loyalty and faithfulness. Why? The spirit of people of ancient times, being wholesome and cordial, was different from that of the decadent present period. As a result, the lords and retainers all had loyal natures. They didn’t lose these traits even though they did not speak about loyalty or faithfulness as the first priority.¹³⁰ Reverence is a practice to be followed for the sake of making loyalty and faithfulness central. So if reverence is instilled within the heart, both loyalty and faithfulness will also emerge.

By the time of Confucius, we see that the world had gradually become decadent. Consequently, by taking loyalty and faithfulness as central, the Sage [Confucius] made these values the basis for culture and moral conduct.¹³¹ By contrast, in more dissolute times, if scholars do not emphasize loyalty and faithfulness and rather emphasize reverence, they will definitely lack solid practices. Eventually there will be no one except those who are overly polite or ostentatious. These are the characteristics of small, hypocritical people and are not appropriate to the Way of the true person. Hereafter, scholars ought to make loyalty and faithfulness central. “Abiding in reverence” is simply a method of making loyalty and faithfulness central.

In recent times scholars of the Way¹³² who were trying to establish a reputation by espousing Confucianism often neglected to consider loyalty and faithfulness as foundational. They promoted “abiding in reverence” to make a name for themselves. For them, to abide in reverence became a forced effort of restraint. People who had superficial gravity lost loyalty and faithfulness as central. They tried to preserve reverence by force, and this was not appropriate for a Way of abiding in reverence. On the contrary, they injured reverence.

The sages [e.g., Confucius and Mencius] give priority to filiality, obedience, loyalty, and faithfulness. Through this [priority] the foundation is established and the Way is born.¹³³ It is an approach that attends to practical things, beginning with things close at hand and ending with lofty and distant things. People who reach great heights start with what is close at hand; people who climb high mountains naturally begin from low places.¹³⁴ By following a sequence, one gradually progresses on the Way. Heterodox teachings, and present-day vulgar Confucianism, regard lofty and distant things as primary. They boast and wish to attain enlightenment in one leap. They are not able to make gradual progress by following a sequence. If we reflect deeply, we will see there is no logic in wishing to force progress. To do so is to neglect to pursue what is solid, and to follow what is empty [impractical].

Influences from Buddhism and Daoism

When Zhu Xi spoke, he frequently used Chan Buddhist expressions. In discussing the art of composition, he said, “Even after reading the classics, such as the Record of the Historian, the History of the Former Han, or the writings of Han Yu and Liu Zongyuan, if we are not enlightened we cut off the head of an old priest.”¹³⁵ “If we hit someone, there is the trace of blood; if we strike someone, there is the clear mark of a stick.”¹³⁶ Presumably because Zhu Xi was immersed in the study of Chan in his early years, he was not able to discard those teachings. This influence is also evident in his jokes. An example is a story about Huo Kuang’s servant who came to life again.¹³⁷ The two Cheng brothers never mentioned these kinds of things.

“The Supreme Ultimate [taiji] and also the nonfinite [wuji]” are found in Dushun’s Huayan View of the Realm of the Dharmas. ¹³⁸ It was passed down from generation to generation and its influence extended even to Zhou Dunyi. The notions that “taiji originates from wuji” and that “abiding in reverence” establishes a fundamental mode for humans are concepts that have been derived from Buddhism and Daoism. Zhu Xi had the greatest respect for Zhou Dun yi, and, because he believed everything in Zhou’s thought, he never doubted these ideas.¹³⁹

The expression “Substance and function come from the same source and there is no gap between the manifest and the hidden”¹⁴⁰ is from the Commentary on the Huayan Sutra, by a Tang priest, Cheng Guan.¹⁴¹ These two phrases are of Buddhist origin. Why did the Song Confucians regard Zhou Dunyi and the Cheng brothers as the first to teach this idea?

The flow of Confucian teachings is one lineage continuing through many ages. The Six Classics and the Four Books have myriad words and phrases, yet, having a common truth, they are consistent. Those who promulgate theories without following the sages, even if their words are those of superb scholars, may be doubted. If there are mistakes, they will only lead later scholars completely astray.

The way to read texts is to seek understanding by inquiring, by removing self-centered opinions, and by relying on the opinions of the sages and worthies. We should not add unneeded, useless words. If we follow these principles, eventually we will comprehend the true meaning of the sages. We should not forcefully promote our own egocentric opinions, nor should we be stubborn, contentious, or careless. If we tend in these directions even slightly, we won’t be able to follow the thinking of the sages and worthies. Even earlier Confucians could not escape mistakes. If scholars have doubts with regard to earlier Confucians, they should not simply believe blindly. An ancient saying notes, “People think that whatever they learn is clearly correct.” However, even superior people are not without failings. The Song Confucians believed in the Diagram of the Supreme Ultimate and in “An Explanation of the Diagram of the Supreme Ultimate,” and they had biases. Having strong opinions and being zealous in learning, they revealed their biases. In perceiving a person’s faults, we come to know their humaneness.¹⁴²

Later scholars, of course, should show respect toward earlier Confucians. However, the path of learning is open to all.¹⁴³ When we make a judgment of right or wrong, we should base it on our own sound and impartial assessment. Why do scholars since the Song tend to make it a practice to flatter the earlier Confucians? How can their learning not be tainted?

Scholars who cling to prejudiced opinions, even though they have doubts regarding the Song Confucians, flatter them and conform to their ideas. Consequently, they spend their whole lives not realizing this. If there are people who harbor even slight doubts, they are frowned upon. They are regarded as biased and heretical, and they are consistently slandered. This is reprehensible and reflects a mistaken obstinacy.

The teaching of the sages is simple and direct; it doesn’t have the defect of invoking strained or overly complicated interpretations. Later scholarship tends to be too fragmented; it doesn’t have wholeness and balance. Thus, true scholars can’t bear all the details. To like simplicity and to dislike detail is a common human feeling. The scholarship of later generations is fragmented; consequently, it is contrary to common human feeling. It is natural that ordinary people dislike that kind of scholarship. When the sages taught, they inspired students to make progress untiringly. When later Confucians taught, things were exactly the opposite.

When the petty person with few talents teaches, he has his self-assurance and he never doubts himself.¹⁴⁴ Not distinguishing between the truths and falsehoods of such persons, many people believe them and don’t doubt them. Their teaching is not designed to inspire people with wisdom and virtue; it is merely a clever act.

If scholars do not follow the classics yet believe in latter-day biased opinions, then how can they realize their mistakes and examine the root of the Great Way?

A Discussion of the Metaphysical and the Physical

In the “Appended Judgments” of the Classic of Changes it says, “In Heaven configurations [patterns or shapes] are created; on Earth physical forms are created.” It also says, “When something is manifested it is called configuration; what has taken physical form is called a concrete thing [material object].” Furthermore, it says, “What is above form is called the Way; what is below form is called a concrete thing.”¹⁴⁵

In my view, “physical form” means having concrete substance. “What is above” means in Heaven. “What is below” means on the Earth. What is “above form” is the material force [qi] of yin and yang; it is without shape and exists in Heaven. It is above the physical forms and the concrete objects of “the ten thousand things.” That is why it is called “above form.” “Configuration” means the refined aspects of forms, and they issue from above. The material force of yin and yang is above and its manifestation we call “becoming configurations.” The two material forces (yin and yang) in Heaven operate and interact, and we call this the Way. What is called “physical forms below” refers to the concreteness of hardness and softness of all things that are in the Earth.¹⁴⁶ Physical forms are the concrete substances of shapes and they remain below. By possessing shape and substance, things are formed. We call them concrete objects.

Heaven exists above, Earth exists below.¹⁴⁷ Thus they are designated “upper” and “lower.” The Way of Heaven is formless and has the configurations [patterns] of yin and yang. Thus it is said, “In Heaven patterns are formed.” The Way of Earth, having physical forms, has concrete substance. As a result it is said, “In Earth physical forms are created.” Hence in Heaven there are no physical forms, while on Earth there are physical forms. Doesn’t the expression “In Heaven configurations are formed” refer to yin and yang? In Heaven yin and yang have neither form nor substance. However, the configurations are revealed due to the movement and transformation of the two material forces of yin and yang. Accordingly, “when something is manifest it is called configuration.” In the Classic of Changes it says, “What establishes the Way of Heaven is called yin and yang.”¹⁴⁸ This means in Heaven there are configurations that have no physical form or substance. Yin and yang flow, and this causes growth in all things.¹⁴⁹ This is the Way of Heaven.

The Way of Heaven is only yin and yang. There is nothing outside of yin and yang. Yin and yang alternate endlessly. We call this flow the Way. Doesn’t the phrase “On Earth physical forms are created” refer to the myriad things? The myriad things indicates mountains, rivers, the great Earth, human beings, and living things, namely all that has shape and exists below. In the Classic of Changes it says: “What establishes the Way of Earth is called hard and soft.”¹⁵⁰ This means that on the Earth there are shapes and they have the characteristics of hardness or softness. These are called concrete things.

The Cheng brothers explained that yin and yang also were below form,¹⁵¹ and Zhu Xi’s Original Meaning of the Classic of Changes followed this interpretation.¹⁵² There is constancy and transformation in the operations of yin and yang. Constancy refers to what is genuine and correct in the operation; this is deemed the Way. Transformation refers to mishaps and biases in the operations; we cannot regard it as the Way. The Cheng brothers and Zhu Xi considered yin and yang to be below form, but that is dividing yin and yang and the Way into two. They also separated principle and material force. They explained it by contrasting the Way as principle with yin and yang as concrete things. I have doubts about this because if we regard yin and yang as below form and say, “In Heaven configurations are formed,” does this indicate only the sun and moon and the Heavenly bodies? If this is so, it is inconsistent with the explanation of yin and yang as producing configurations. This is the first point of disagreement.

That which is “below form” indicates that which has physical shape and is on the Earth. Mountains, rivers, the great Earth, human beings, and living things are all concrete things. We call things that have [physical] substance concrete things. Yin and yang have no substance, so we can’t call them concrete things. This is the second point of disagreement.

Yin and yang are in Heaven and form configurations. They do not take shape on Earth. Yet the Cheng brothers and Zhu Xi say, “Yin and yang are also below form.” This is the third point of disagreement.

Again, in the Classic of Changes it says, “What establishes the Way of Heaven is called yin and yang.” This indicates that the flow of the two material forces is the Way. Similarly, “What establishes the Way of Earth is called hard and soft.” This indicates that concrete things are objects that take form through the characteristics of softness and hardness. This also doesn’t regard yin and yang as being concrete things. This is the fourth point of disagreement.

As for the two characters of “above” and “below,” they are clear when we say they refer to “existing in Heaven” and “existing on Earth.” If it isn’t so, the meaning of these two characters is difficult to understand. This is the fifth point of disagreement.

I still can’t understand these explanations of the earlier [Song] Confucians. That is because they are different from the words of the Sage¹⁵³ in the Classic of Changes. However, I don’t want to emphasize my own foolish opinion by criticizing earlier scholars. I am simply recording my doubts while awaiting the views of wiser individuals.

The Supreme Ultimate

In the “Appended Judgments” of the Classic of Changes it is stated: “In the changes there is the Supreme Ultimate [taiji] and it generates two forms.”¹⁵⁴ Zhou Dunyi interpreted this as: “The nonfinite [wuji] and also the Supreme Ultimate [taiji].”¹⁵⁵ Zhu Xi said, “If we don’t refer to the nonfinite, the Supreme Ultimate will be on the same level as things and thus we can’t regard it as the origin of the transformation in all things.”¹⁵⁶ In my view, the Supreme Ultimate is the name applicable to the material force in the state of chaos existing before yin and yang separated and the myriad things emerged. Nonetheless, it has the highest principle and so it is called the Supreme Ultimate. All the myriad things of Heaven and Earth are based on this. We don’t speak of nothingness, we say “existence.” In other words, this implies that “in the changes the Supreme Ultimate exists.” “Wuji and taiji” is an expression from Buddhism and Daoism. Clearly it implies that “existence arises from nothingness.” In Laozi it says, “All things in the world come from being. And being comes from non-being.”¹⁵⁷

To regard nothingness as the origin and fundamental spirit of all things is a Buddhist and Daoist idea. To regard existence as the origin and essence of all things is the teaching of the sages. Hence the explanations concerning existence and nonexistence are the dividing line between the Way of the sages and other paths. We must elucidate this carefully. If we wish to discuss the Supreme Ultimate, we should not explain the character for nothingness as prior. The Supreme Ultimate is formless; even a foolish person like myself understands that. Therefore, on the question whether people would misunderstand the Supreme Ultimate as a thing, we needn’t worry about it. Moreover, we should not regard the character for ultimate to mean form.

In Zhu Xi’s Classified Conversations he speaks of the nonfinite as being without form,¹⁵⁸ but this does not express the original meaning of the phrase. Zhu Xi hoped that his discussions would be accepted without question and that people would have no doubts about the veracity of “An Explanation of the Diagram of the Supreme Ultimate.” Therefore, he overemphasized these words. Why were they different from his ordinary, reasonable, and direct words?

In discussing Zhu Xi’s remarks on “An Explanation of the Diagram of the Supreme Ultimate,” Lu Xiangshan commented that there is certainly such a reality as the Supreme Ultimate. The sages clearly indicated this. They did not establish their arguments with empty words to mislead later generations with speeches and stories. “An Explanation of the Diagram of the Supreme Ultimate” uses the term “nonfinite” at the beginning; but throughout Zhou Dunyi’s book Penetrating the Classic of Changes, the term “nonfinite” is not used even once. The works of the Cheng brothers are quite numerous; however, they never used “nonfinite.” Even if Zhou actually made the Diagram of the Supreme Ultimate in his early years, in his later years he never mentioned the nonfinite, and after he progressed in learning, it is clear that he no longer considered his earlier position correct.¹⁵⁹

Lu Xiangshan also said: “In the changes, the Supreme Ultimate exists.”¹⁶⁰ The sages spoke of the Supreme Ultimate; why do we now say “nonfinite”? When the Sage composed the “Appended Judgments,”¹⁶¹ he did not mention the nonfinite. However, how could he have regarded the Supreme Ultimate as the same as a thing yet not as the basis of the myriad transformations?¹⁶² He also observed: “Zhu Zifa¹⁶³ said ‘Zhou Dunyi received the Diagram of the Supreme Ultimate from a Northern Song Daoist, Mu Bozhang, and it was transmitted to Mu by Chen Xiyi.’”¹⁶⁴ This had definitely been confirmed. The learning of Chen Xiyi is in the tradition of Laozi. The characters for nonfinite appear in Laozi. ¹⁶⁵ The phrase is not in the classical texts of the Confucian sages.

In my view, if we look at these various statements of Lu with an open mind, they seem to be true. This one phrase of “the nonfinite and also the Supreme Ultimate” appears in the Huayan View of the Realm of the Dharmas, written by Dushun of the Tang.¹⁶⁶ It reflects a Buddhist theory, and we shouldn’t call it Confucian. Despite his extensive learning, Zhu Xi didn’t recognize this. The term “nonfinite” is originally Daoist. In a later period the Buddhists also adopted it because their way of thinking was similar. As Lu Xiangshan noted, the Diagram of the Supreme Ultimate first appeared with Chen Xiyi and it isn’t found in the writings of the Confucian sages. These words are authoritative and naturally we should not deny their truth.

The phrase “the nonfinite and also the Supreme Ultimate” originally appeared in Buddhist texts.¹⁶⁷ Later, Zhou came to realize that it had not been used by the sages. Thus, he did not mention nonfinite in his Penetrating the Classic of Changes, as Lu Xiangshan pointed out. Since the nonfinite isn’t mentioned in the collected works of the Cheng brothers, we should realize that they didn’t approve of the theory of the nonfinite. Laozi says, “The nameless is the origin of Heaven and Earth; the named is the mother of all things.”¹⁶⁸ In Laozi it is also stated, “All things in the world come from being. And being comes from non-being.”¹⁶⁹ The teaching of Laozi is that nonexistence precedes existence. The Confucian sages never spoke this way. In other words, “the nonfinite and also the Supreme Ultimate” implies Laozi’s theory of the precedence of nonexistence over existence, and this means that existence arises from nothingness.

Chen Xiyi transmitted the Diagram of the Supreme Ultimate to Mu Bozhang, and he in turn transmitted it to Zhou Dunyi. I think Chen Xiyi and Mu Bozhang were followers of Daoist thought. Wang Ziquan¹⁷⁰ said, “Chen Xiyi studied under Shouya,¹⁷¹ a priest of the Helin temple.” This probably explains the origin of the Diagram.

Zhu Xi’s respect for Zhou was great. Thus, he did not suspect that “An Explanation of the Diagram of the Supreme Ultimate” might be an unfinished manuscript from Zhou’s early years. He did not know that its theory emerged from heterodox teachings and considered it actually to be Zhou’s composition. He revered it profoundly¹⁷² and devoted most of his efforts to it.

Fearing the doubts of various later Confucians, he defended it vigorously and analyzed it in every aspect. Many of his arguments and theories came out of it. Such an insightful scholar as Zhu Xi did this. How strange it is!

Hao Jingshan¹⁷³ said in New Insights Acquired Through Constant Stu dy: “The learning of Zhou Dunyi was received from Chen Tuan¹⁷⁴ of Mount Hua.” Someone added that Zhou, like Hu Wengong,¹⁷⁵ was taught by Shouya, a priest of the Helin temple of Runzhou.¹⁷⁶ There is now a small shrine for Zhou near the temple. Zhang Jingfu¹⁷⁷ said Zhou Dunyi was taught by Chen Tuan and he studied dwelling in tranquility. Consequently, for Zhou having purity and frankness of heart and being open-minded and without distractions were fundamental. For many Confucians the scholarship of the learning of the principles was influenced by Chan Buddhism.¹⁷⁸

The Way and Concrete Things

In the “Appended Judgments” of the Classic of Changes it says, “What is above form is called the Way; what is below form is called a concrete thing.” The material force of yin and yang is in Heaven and this is the Way. In other words, it is “above physical form.” This force grows and alternates and becomes yin and yang. Material force is ceaselessly productive; being pure and without evil, it has principle and is not chaotic. Is this not the Way? When the primal material force of Heaven manifests itself on Earth, it evolves into physical form. This results in human beings and the myriad things. The evolution into physical form encompasses everything: mountains, rivers, grass, and trees; birds, animals, insects, and fish; frost, snow, rain, and dew. In other words, these are “what is below form.” All physical forms on the Earth are referred to as concrete things.

Zhu Xi said, “Before Heaven and Earth existed there was principle.”¹⁷⁹ He also said, “In the beginning there were no things. There was only principle.”¹⁸⁰ It seems strange to me that these words are found in the learning of an enlightened, wise person. Zhu Xi’s words are similar to those of Laozi, which assert that the Way creates Heaven and Earth and that existence arises from nonexistence.

Returning the World to Humaneness

“If for one day a person can subdue himself and return to propriety, all under Heaven [the world] will return to humaneness.”¹⁸¹ One day means for a sustained period. It refers to an ongoing period of moral practice. It does not mean it will be accomplished in one day. Disciplining oneself and returning to propriety is an extremely difficult thing. Sustained effort toward that must be made over a long period of time. How can one expect that it can be done in one day? The word “return” is the same as in Mencius, “The people return to humaneness.”¹⁸² It means returning and settling in a certain place. If one disciplines oneself and returns to propriety, the ill effects of selfish desires and the separation between oneself and one’s environment disappear. Although the world is vast and people and things are numerous, the capacity of our heart extends to every place and forms one body with all things. If we abide within the circumference of a humane heart, love will be felt everywhere.

For example, it is like the human body. If one isn’t sick and the circulation of qi and blood is good, qi flows throughout our entire body and becomes part of ourselves. This is returning to humaneness. If qi and blood circulate incompletely, the hands and feet will become numb and the skin will lose its sensitivity. Each part will seem no longer attached to oneself even though it is one’s own body. In medical books this state of insensitivity is called a lack of humaneness.

Humaneness is regarding Heaven and Earth and all things as one body; it means that there is nothing that is alien to oneself.¹⁸³ Yang Shi thought that “humaneness was within everyone’s own heart,”¹⁸⁴ and Lü Dalin also said “the expansive universe is within our own gate.”¹⁸⁵ These are true statements. The saying “All under Heaven will return to humaneness” means if we are impartial, there is no room for selfish desires and love will be evident everywhere, even though the universe is so vast. This is also the meaning of the Western Inscription. ¹⁸⁶

Zhu Xi says, “If for one day we discipline ourselves and return to propriety, all people under Heaven will acknowledge their own humaneness.”¹⁸⁷ This is to emphasize that the result will be very quick.

In my view the realization of humaneness can’t occur in one day. The words of the sages are reliable and differ from the hyperbolic claims of the Buddhists and Daoists, who teach incoherent stories that lack common sense. In general, since there are actualities under Heaven, inevitably there are principles. If a person [a ruler] can discipline himself and return to humaneness just for one day, all people would praise him for his humaneness. But this is not attainable and, therefore, there is no such principle. Moreover, saying that there will be an immediate result in one day is boasting and contrasts markedly with the modest self-reflection of the sages.

Even though someone is praised by the world, it doesn’t mean he must therefore be regarded as a humane person. Even a rebel like Wang Mang¹⁸⁸ was deceptive at first because he appeared to be a gentleman. People were deceived by him, and approximately 480,000 people praised his virtuous conduct in memorials to the throne. The ministers and leaders all said, “We should quickly increase his rewards.” This is recorded in the History of the Han Dynasty.

From the above example, we can see that unless someone is truly humane, we should not call it humaneness even though the world praises it as humaneness. Conversely, if someone is truly humane, he does not lose humaneness even though there is no one who praises him. Although no one praised Tai Bo,¹⁸⁹ Confucius regarded him to be outstanding in virtue. Zhou Dunyi was very intelligent but only the Cheng brothers realized that;¹⁹⁰ other people did not appreciate it. However, there is no doubt that he was intelligent. The higher one’s standards, the fewer the people who can meet them. However, many do not realize this and so a person can be [wrongly] regarded as benevolent. Just because many people praise a person, that does not mean such a person must be recognized as benevolent. Therefore, even if no one recognizes a person’s humaneness, he could still be humane. The fact that everyone praises someone’s humaneness is not sufficient reason to regard him as humane.

It says in the Analects, “How do you regard a person who is loved by all in his village?” Confucius replied, “We may not necessarily give our approval to him.”¹⁹¹ What we call the way of humaneness isn’t derived from others’ praise. That is why it is said: “The source of humaneness is in oneself; it cannot be gotten from others.”¹⁹² When the world praises humaneness, it is like the phrase: “To be famous if employed by the state; to be famous if employed by a ruling family.”¹⁹³ To be praised by the whole world for humaneness is similar to “being famous.” This is because both are derived from external appearances. They indicate reputation, not real achievement.¹⁹⁴ This perspective differs from what Confucius meant when he said, “Ah, who knows me; perhaps only Heaven.”¹⁹⁵ Thus, the sage relied on himself rather than others.

It is more appropriate to interpret the character for “return” as meaning to “rest in” rather than “to praise.” Kong Yingda of the Tang dynasty said, “The meaning of ‘return’ [in the Analects] is similar to its meaning in ‘to return to the fundamental standard’ of the Great Plan in the Book of Documents.”¹⁹⁶ Lü Zuqian said, “The character ‘to return’ in the returning to the fundamental standard is the same as the character ‘to return’ which means resting in one place.”¹⁹⁷ These views are reliable and also tenable.

Hence, to say, “All under Heaven will return to humaneness” means that if one disciplines oneself and observes propriety, one’s mind will be impartial and unselfish; one will see other people and other things as equal to oneself. All things under Heaven will be objects of love; they will all “return” and be part of one’s humaneness. Humaneness is regarding Heaven and Earth and all things as being one body, inseparable from oneself.

However, even where Zhu Xi replies to Yang Shi,¹⁹⁸ the meaning is the same as in the Commentary on the Analects. Thus, Zhu Xi regards the saying “All under Heaven will return to humaneness” as an overstatement. It is also a lofty goal that one should not take lightly, yet I can’t agree with this interpretation [by Zhu Xi]. On the contrary, I regard as true the explanation of Yang Shi and Lü Dalin, who say that all is complete within oneself. This viewpoint agrees with the original meaning of “all under Heaven will return to humaneness.” We should not consider their statements as too lofty.¹⁹⁹ Although I disagree with Zhu’s interpretation, I have merely recorded my opinion and I await the correction of wiser men in the future.

Reverence and Sincerity

Reverence is a method of preserving the heart that the sages transmitted through the ages. If one has reverence, one has virtue; if one does not have reverence, one does not have virtue. Therefore, the ancients believed that reverence was something that could protect²⁰⁰ and foster virtue.²⁰¹ However, why did the sages regard loyalty and faithfulness as central, and why didn’t they make reverence central?

Both sincerity and reverence are essential for the pursuit of learning. However, sincerity is the basis and reverence is the effort. It is fundamental to place priority on loyalty and faithfulness; such is the aim of learning. “Abiding in reverence” is a method for emphasizing loyalty and faithfulness; it cannot be the basis. The basis and the method are integrally related, but we must not confuse them. Sincerity and reverence are, of course, relative in their importance. It is like the relative importance of a ruler and his ministers; they cannot be equal. If we take reverence as central, reverence becomes primary and sincerity becomes secondary. Explaining the truth is like trying to balance scales—if one side is given too much weight, the other side will appear to have too little. When we overemphasize the centrality of reverence, surely loyalty and faithfulness are undervalued. If this occurs, although a person’s outside appearance is solemn, within he may be frivolous. That means if sincerity is lacking, our actions will have no meaning.²⁰²

In regulating their conduct, scholars should necessarily combine ritual and music in order to attain a dignified seriousness and a peaceful composure. Why do they tend only toward a solemn seriousness? Obstinate people of today don’t understand the meaning of reverence. They feel restrained by reverence and they become overly particular, stagnant, narrow-minded, rigid, and restricted. In their hearts they become withered and dried up, and they lack peace and joy. In relations with others, they have no compassion, warmth, or gentleness, and they are only severely critical of others. In their character, they lack humaneness and reciprocity. Their minds are restricted and tense and their appearance is not tranquil.

The Song Confucians greatly valued reverence²⁰³ and regarded it as the master of the mind-and-heart. Scholars of later periods frequently imitated the worst of this tendency and valued only seriousness. They did not realize that loyalty, faithfulness, and compassion were most important. If we value only seriousness and severity, and if we undervalue loyalty, faithfulness, and compassion, we will become perversely solemn and cruel, and ultimately inhumane. Is this appropriate for a noble person?

The teaching of the sages was rooted in making loyalty and faithfulness central and making abiding in reverence the method. This is the teaching of the Confucian sages, which first builds up this root and next takes abiding in reverence as the method for making loyalty and faithfulness central. We must follow this sequence. The Song Confucians diligently made the virtue of reverence central. Since they weren’t single-minded with regard to making loyalty and faithfulness central, their method was different from the method of the Confucian sages. Reverence is a method of self-cultivation; it is something appropriate for the sake of preserving sincerity. But the method of the sages makes loyalty and faithfulness central; I have not heard that it makes reverence central. If one tries to make loyalty and faithfulness central and also tries to make reverence central, then the mind will have two masters. Of course, we ought to respect the idea of abiding in reverence. However, we can’t make it alone central.

Reverence as the Master of the Mind

Zhu Xi said, “Reverence is the master of [regulates] the mind-andheart and is the basis of all things.”²⁰⁴ He believed that “disciplining oneself through reverence”²⁰⁵ is the highest teaching of the sages. If one’s mind-and-heart is not reverent, it will not be preserved. Thus he advocated reverence as a way to hold the moral mind firmly. This is the meaning of the statement “If we hold fast to the mind, the mind is preserved.”²⁰⁶ The expression “master” indicates a method for preserving the mind. This does not mean reverence is the master of the mind. The reader should not get caught in semantics and miss the real meaning.

Nonetheless, in the present period there are people who flatter Zhu Xi.²⁰⁷ They say, “If we make reverence central to the mind, how can this harm the Way?” But I don’t think these words are correct. Then what should we make the central basis of the human mind-and-heart? As Confucius says, “We should make loyalty and faithfulness central to the human mind-and-heart.”²⁰⁸ This is exactly what the Doctrine of the Mean says: “The attainment of sincerity is the Way of the human.”²⁰⁹ How could we abandon the Way of the human as central but adopt a method of clinging to reverence as central? No matter how virtuous and good the deeds can be, they cannot be regarded as central.

Reverence suffices as a method of self-discipline. Since [the time of] Yao and Shun, reverence has been a method of self-cultivation transmitted by the sages and worthies throughout history. However, since Confucius, Zengzi, Zisi, and Mencius didn’t speak of regarding reverence as central, we should realize that it isn’t consistent with the ancient sages and worthies to regard it as central.

Loyalty means one shouldn’t be deceptive. This is substance. Faithfulness means one shouldn’t be false. This is function. If we join loyalty and faithfulness, we have sincerity. Sincerity, being the master of the mind-and-heart, is the Way of humans.

In the Classic of Changes it says, “Loyalty and faithfulness are the methods of progressing toward virtue.”²¹⁰ Without sincerity, even humaneness, duty, propriety, and wisdom are empty and artificial. If we don’t make loyalty and faithfulness central, certainly the pursuit of learning will lack a foundation and we won’t be able to progress. Reverence is, of course, a method that preserves the mind-andheart. Reverence is something that fosters virtue. However, it cannot be regarded as the master of the mind-and-heart.

Sincerity is the true principle for humans;²¹¹ it is having an authentic mind-and-heart. Accordingly, it is good to make a sincere mind-and-heart central, and we should not take the method of controlling the mind as central. The respect, intelligence, refinement, and reflection of Yao,²¹² the gentle gravity of Shun,²¹³ the mindfulness of Yu,²¹⁴ the deep virtue of Tang, which progressed daily,²¹⁵ the cultivated virtue of Wen,²¹⁶ the conquest of laziness²¹⁷ of Tai Gong,²¹⁸ the straightening within and disciplining oneself through reverence of Confucius,²¹⁹ and the reverence described in the Record of Rites²²⁰—all are important methods of the sages for educating the people through self-discipline. The way of learning of the true person ought to value reverence. It is the method for making loyalty and faithfulness central. If there is reverence, we can attain sincerity. However, we can’t regard reverence itself as the master of the mind-and-heart.

In the words of Cheng Mingdao, “Sincerity is the Way of Heaven; reverence is the root of human affairs. If we have reverence, we will become sincere.”²²¹ I think it is good to call reverence the root of human affairs, but it is not good to call it central. As Confucius observed, “In Heaven there are not two suns, on Earth one shouldn’t serve two rulers.”²²² Similarly, how can there be two masters in the mind-and-heart of humans? If we regard loyalty and faithfulness as central and if we also regard reverence as central, it will be like having two masters in one mind. Among the virtues, we ought to distinguish between certain principal ones and other complementary ones. Loyalty and faithfulness are principal virtues, while the four virtues of humaneness, rightness, propriety, and wisdom are complementary virtues. If we make central what should be complementary, even though we may clearly be virtuous, we will be unable to avoid being flawed by vices.

If we incline too much toward humaneness, we are apt to be partial. If we incline toward duty, we are apt to be cruel. If we incline toward propriety, we are apt to be foolishly polite. If we incline toward wisdom, we are apt to be overly critical. How much more so if we make the method [of abiding in reverence] central? If a person makes reverence central and doesn’t make loyalty and faithfulness central, he will tend to be outwardly solemn, overly careful about details, restrictive, fearful, and narrow-minded. The excesses are too numerous to count.

Those who stress reverence in the present day don’t know the Way of reverence. Frequently they become externally solemn but in fact have a false austerity and formality. On the surface they appear self-disciplined and respectful, but actually they are arrogant and weak.²²³ This is because they don’t make loyalty and faithfulness central. Only those people who make loyalty and faithfulness central will be without fault. That is because making them central is the foundation of virtue. Loyalty and faithfulness are the sincerity of human beings and find their great source in the Way of Heaven.²²⁴ The Way of human beings is the means by which the four virtues of humaneness, rightness, propriety, and wisdom are actualized. So, it is said, “Loyalty and faithfulness are the means to proceed toward virtue.”²²⁵ “These are the means by which the three virtues of wisdom, humaneness and courage are enacted.”²²⁶ We ought to call them regulators of the mind-and-heart.

The various Song teachers gave priority to the discussion of philosophy. Zhu Xi’s Reflections on Things at Hand²²⁷ places “An Explanation of the Diagram of the Supreme Ultimate” in the opening chapter. This makes the achievement of a “higher learning” primary and makes “basic learning” from what is close at hand secondary. This is different from the teachings of Confucius and Mencius.

The word “reverence” implies a method for disciplining the mind-and-heart that was transmitted from the ancient sages. We should clarify this by referring to the sages’ explanations of reverence in the Six Classics and Four Books. The Classic of Odes notes, “Trembling with fear is like facing a deep abyss or walking on thin ice.”²²⁸ It also says, “We should be very careful.”²²⁹ The Doctrine of the Mean observes, “The superior person is cautious about what he does not see and apprehensive about what he does not hear.”²³⁰ In Guanzi it says, “What we think of as the mean [balance] is the foundation for one’s words and deeds. From time immemorial, people who tried to accomplish something always began from here.”²³¹ These are all explanations of reverence. The words are easy and the meaning is clear. Zhu Xi explained reverence in his later years and said, “Reverence is nothing but awe.”²³² Sun Simiao is quoted in Reflections on Things at Hand as saying, “We want to be brave but cautious.”²³³

In my view, awe is a correct explanation for reverence. Probably in explaining the word “reverence” we ought to rely first on these explanations. They are sufficient without being too wordy. It means, in short, holding fast to the mind and not letting go, and managing affairs with care. The explanations regarding reverence of the Song Confucians were recklessly profuse and extremely redundant. They overexerted themselves trying to explain reverence. In their studies they were too severe and tried too hard “to assist things.”²³⁴ Scholars became exhausted from rigid conventions and were inhibited by being overly careful or overly concerned about reverence. This was not like the teachings of the sages. I think that, since their attempts to preserve the mind were too intense and oppressive, their attitudes and external appearance were not relaxed and comfortable. Certainly one cannot maintain such a posture for a long time.

The Way that controls the mind is like the measuring of weights with scales. When we increase one side even a little, it becomes too heavy; when we decrease it even a little, it becomes too light. We only hope to have equilibrium. What I am getting at is that we should maintain a balance between “neglecting and forcing.”²³⁵ If we are overly careful, we probably cannot preserve reverence for a long time. In his leisure time at home Confucius was relaxed,²³⁶ and so we should note that his daily life was calm and peaceful. Without this attitude even a wise person cannot preserve reverence for long, and the method of cultivating the mind-and-heart will suffer.

In Correcting Youthful Ignorance [Zhang Zai] says, “We are able to discuss human nature with those who know that death does not imply the end of a human being.”²³⁷ But in Knowledge Painfully Acquired [Luo Qinshun] says, “When there is this thing, there is this li (principle). Upon the disintegration of qi, there is death, and ultimately this thing returns to nothingness. When there is no longer this thing, there is no longer this li. How could there be this so-called death without annihilation?”²³⁸ The Song Confucians [such as Zhang Zai] regard human nature as principle, and they seem to suggest that in material force there is no life and death; while in principle there is no life and death. This is a heterodox claim [to imply there is no death]. It is the same as saying, “One who dies but does not perish enjoys long life.”²³⁹ Using Luo Qinshun’s explanation, we may counteract the errors of heterodox learning, and, moreover, we may dissolve the doubt of other scholars. In Zhang Zai’s Correcting Youthful Ignorance there are also questionable points like this. The wisdom and learning of Zhang Zai was next only to that of the Cheng brothers. But his views are rough and incoherent and degenerate into heterodoxy. How frightening are the errors of learning!

Zhuangzi says, “With a little effort we can achieve significant results; this is the Way of the sages.”²⁴⁰ Although these words of Zhuangzi are from heterodox learning [part of the Daoist tradition], we should believe them because the teaching of the ancient sages was originally concise and simple. The overly complicated scholarship and talkative discussions of the Song Confucians gradually became too intricate and incoherent. It is different from the Way of the sages, which is discussed in Zhuangzi.

The ancient sages regarded yin and yang as the Way and they didn’t speak of the Way apart from yin and yang. The Song Confucians regarded the Way as separate from yin and yang and as something empty and void and without vitality or power.²⁴¹ They also regarded it as the root of all things and as the mystery of the Supreme Ultimate, but it was not the “Way of the sages.” The Way of the sages is the life-giving principle found in Heaven and Earth. The original material force harmonizing yin and yang is ceaselessly fecund. Thus, in the Doctrine of the Mean it says, “The great Way of the sages is vast and causes the development and growth of all things.”²⁴² It flows through the seasons and never stops. It is the root of all transformations and the place from which all things emerge. It is the origin of all that is received from Heaven and it is different from the emptiness that is taught in Buddhism and Daoism.

Principle is the principle of material force.²⁴³ When a single material force flows through the four seasons, in origination, growth, gathering, and storing, there is no confusion; with a correct sequence, there is no disorder. Therefore, principle should be recognized in material force itself. For example, it is like water. The essence of water is its purity and tendency to flow downward. Water and what is pure and flows are, therefore, not two things. It is clear that we should not divide them and regard them as two. So, too, the material force of yin and yang, which is orderly and not chaotic, is the Way. If order and correctness are lacking, there is not the essence of material force. It is not the Way.

The teaching of the sages made propriety primary. The Song Confucians based their teachings mainly on principle. This was different from the teachings of the sages. The Song Confucians put lofty attainment before basic learning. For instance, they considered “An Explanation of the Diagram of the Supreme Ultimate” the first step in learning.²⁴⁴ This also was different from the teachings of the sages. The words of the sage Confucius are regarded as an immutable model for learning. They are recorded in one volume of the Analects, and there is no need to look beyond this. If we do, we are likely to fall into heterodox learning.

The Inseparability of Principle and Material Force

When we begin to search for the wellspring of the Way of Heaven and Earth, it is not yet divided into yin and yang. Rather, there is a single primal undifferentiated material force. That is the state where highest principle exists but the configuration of yin and yang has not yet appeared. If we give it a name, it is called the “Supreme Ultimate” [taiji]. “Supreme” means highest and “Ultimate” means extreme. The Supreme Ultimate is the root of the Way and the origin of all things. Among all things, there is nothing more revered. We can’t describe it sufficiently, so we refer to it as the Supreme Ultimate.²⁴⁵

The primal material force moves and alternates and it is called yang. That is the movement of the Supreme Ultimate. It moves and then becomes quiet. Being quiet, it congeals, and this is called yin. This is the tranquility of the Supreme Ultimate.

After it is tranquil, it moves and alternates between movement and tranquility, operating ceaselessly. Yin and yang are distinguished by the movement and tranquility of the primal material force. They are not two material forces. Yang is the movement of the one primal material force and yin is the congealing of the primal material force. Both are the activity and tranquility of the Supreme Ultimate. Confucius said, “In the changes there is the Supreme Ultimate and it gives rise to the yin and yang.”²⁴⁶

If the single material force is not yet divided, the nebulous matter of the single primal material force may be regarded as the Supreme Ultimate.²⁴⁷ When yin and yang are already divided, the Way of yin and yang is the movement of the Supreme Ultimate. The Supreme Ultimate and yin and yang are divided into before and after, and they have different names, but it is understood that there is no difference between them. The Supreme Ultimate is the revered name of the one primal material force before it divides into yin and yang. Yin and yang are the names of the Supreme Ultimate after dividing. In actuality it is not two things. Since yin and yang are divided through the movement and tranquility of the Supreme Ultimate, the flow of yin and yang may be called the principle of the Supreme Ultimate. In the Classic of Changes it says, “The alternation of yin and yang is the Way.”²⁴⁸

The Way has the same connotation as a path; it is called this because it is a condition in which there is movement. That [condition] is the place of movement of the primal material force, and this is called the Way. Yin and yang are the movement and tranquility of the primal material force. Becoming yin and then yang, they alternate ceaselessly. In its primal undifferentiated condition, it is called the Supreme Ultimate; in the condition of flowing alternation, it is named the Way. Hence the Supreme Ultimate and the Way actually are one. The Way is the circulation of the Supreme Ultimate, and the Supreme Ultimate is the term used before the movement of the primal material force. The Way and the Supreme Ultimate are not two separate things.

The circulation of the two phases of yin and yang is logical, is not chaotic, is always orderly, and is called the Way. This is the essence of the two aspects of the primal material force. That which is confused and disorderly cannot be called the Way because it isn’t natural.

Spring’s warmth, summer’s heat, autumn’s cool, winter’s cold are normal and correct and indicate Heaven’s Way. If summer is cold and winter is warm, this is not normal and is not the Way. If yin and yang are normal, they are the Way. This is the original state of yin and yang and it is exactly the same as “establishing the Way of Heaven and calling it yin and yang.”²⁴⁹ Similarly, every year there is an unchanging order from growth to harvest. That too is the flow of yin and yang and is also called the Way. There is not something else in yin and yang that we call the Way. A Ming Confucian, Ke Shengqian, correctly observed that “the movement of material force is natural, and is called principle.”

There is only one material force between Heaven and Earth, and when there is movement and tranquility, we call it yin and yang. The virtue of ceaseless production we call life [creativity]. In the Classic of Changes it says, “The great virtue of Heaven and Earth is called life.”²⁵⁰ The flow of this material force sometimes becomes yin and sometimes yang and we call it the Way. Since it has its logical and orderly flow, we also call it principle. Although the referents are not the same, and the names are different, it is actually all one reality.

Because of this, the movement of yin and yang is pure and orderly and this is the Way. Thus, principle and material force are definitely one, not two things. In other words, principle doesn’t exist without material force and vice versa. Principle is not divided into before and after. No distinction can be made regarding temporal sequence. If there were no material force, how could principle exist? This is the reason principle and material force can’t be separated. We can’t say principle exists before and material force exists after,²⁵¹ and so we can’t have a relationship of before and after. Again, principle and material force aren’t two; we can’t separate them. Principle is not something that exists separately; it is simply the principle of material force.

We call the Way the pure, orderly movement of material force. Since the movement is orderly and logical, it is called principle. The Way and principle are actually one thing. If we think that principle is one thing and resides only temporarily in material force, how is that different from the words of Laozi: “There was something undifferentiated and yet complete, which existed before Heaven and Earth,”²⁵² or the words of the Buddhists: “Something existed before Heaven and Earth and is shapeless. It is always the sovereign of the myriad forms, and following the four seasons it doesn’t decay.”²⁵³ The material force of the great harmony of Heaven and Earth is the regularity of yin and yang. Because of this, it can create all things and becomes the basis of all things. This highest principle should not be scorned as a concrete object below form. Rather, principle and material force are one.

As movement and change are the Way’s functions, it is ceaselessly producing and is called material force. As planting, growth, harvest, and storage follow a definite order without confusion, we call it principle. In reality these [principle and material force] are only one thing. However, when we call it principle, this refers to the purity and perfect goodness of material force. Thus, it can be described as unchanging. When we speak of material force as disorderly, this refers to those chaotic and turbulent aspects that lack regularity. This happens because material force moves, changes, and never stops. It then lacks regularity. However, this [chaotic stage] is not the original state of yin and yang. If we speak of the constancy of material force, we mean it is not disorderly. That constancy is the original state of material force. This is simply principle.

If we speak of water, we know water is originally pure. However, if it is mixed with mud, it loses purity and becomes dirty and polluted, but that dirtiness isn’t the original state of the water. Material force has power that creates all things; therefore one may say that principle also has power that creates all things.²⁵⁴ Yet if we say that principle has the power to create material force, it is wrong.²⁵⁵ That is because “principle is the principle of material force.” No distinction can be made regarding whether principle is prior or after material force, or whether principle is the foundation and material force is secondary. In a reply of Zhu Xi to Liu Shuwen,²⁵⁶ he says that “principle and material force are definitely two things.” His other views on this topic had the same implications. “The operations of yin and yang are the Way” is an explanation of the sages. These two positions are contradictory. I am at a loss and still unable to resolve them. I don’t know which to choose.

NOTES

1. “Earlier Confucian” refers to Lu Xiangshan (1139–1193), a Neo-Confucian of the Southern Song period.

2. Lu Xiangshan quanshu [Complete Works of Lu Xiangshan], Sibu beiyao (Shanghai: Zhonghua shuji, 1927–1935), 35:29b (hereafter cited as SBBY).

3. Zhuzi yulei [Classified Conversations of Zhu Xi], ed. Li Jingde (Kyoto: Chūbun shuppansha, 1982), chap. 11, 296.

4. Zhu Xi said: “If our doubt is great our progress will be great. If we are aware of our progress and say that we have attained it, it proves that our progress has not yet been great” (ibid., chap. 115, 4414).

5. “Explanation of the Words and Sentences,” in Book of Changes, trans. James Legge (New York: Dover, 1963), 416. “The Doctrine of the Mean” says: “When there is anything not yet studied, or studied but not yet understood, do not give up. When there is any question not yet asked, or asked but its answer is not yet known, do not give up” (A Source Book in Chinese Philosophy, trans. and comp. Wing-tsit Chan [Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1963], 107).

6. Analects 2:4: “The Master said, ‘At fifteen I set my heart on learning.’”

7. Yao and Shun are the two legendary sage-rulers of ancient China, with whom the Classic of Documents opens.

8. “The Counsels of the Great Yu,” in The Shu King, vol. 3 of The Chinese Classics, trans. James Legge (Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 1960), 61–62. This remark first appears as part of Yu’s advice to Shun upon the latter’s ascension to the throne. Orthodox Neo-Confucian interpretations of this remark, however, view it as “a message of the mind” passed from Yao to Shun, and then from Shun to Yu in conducting the coronation rites. For a discussion of this remark’s importance in the Chinese intellectual tradition, see Wm. Theodore de Bary, Neo-Confucian Orthodoxy and the Learning of the Mind-and-Heart (New York: Columbia University Press, 1981), and The Message in the Mind in Neo-Confucianism (New York: Columbia University Press, 1988).

9. The five constant virtues are humaneness, wisdom, rightness, ritual decorum, and trustworthiness. See Zhu Xi, “The Mean by Chapter and Phrase,” and Xu Heng, “Straight Talk on the Essentials of the Great Learning,” in Sources of Chinese Tradition, ed. Wm. Theodore de Bary and Irene Bloom (New York: Columbia University Press, 1999), 1:735, 771.

10. These are often referred to as the “three dynasties” of ancient China, dating from approximately the second millennium to the third century B.C.E.

11. Han dynasty (202 B.C.E.–220 C.E.); Tang dynasty (618–906).

12. Song dynasty (960–1279). The teachers referred to here are presumably Zhou Dunyi (1017–1073), Shao Yong (1011–1077), Zhang Zai (1020– 1077), Cheng Hao (1032–1085), Cheng Yi (1033–1107), and Zhu Xi (1130–1200).

13. Pi Yong, Zhongguo zixue mingzhu jizheng [Commentaries on the Comprehensive Discussions in the White Tiger Hall], Baihu tong shuzheng, 86: 302–303.

14. Zhuzi yulei, chap. 115, 4414.

15. Zhou Dunyi, “Explanation of the Diagram of the Supreme Polarity” (Taiji tushuo), in Sources of Chinese Tradition, ed. de Bary and Bloom, 1:673. See also Zhu Xi, Reflections on Things at Hand, trans. Wing-tsit Chan (New York: Columbia University Press, 1967), 5: “The Ultimate of Nonbeing [wuji] and also the Supreme Ultimate [taiji].”

16. Zhu Xi said: “Fundamentally principle and material force cannot be spoken of as prior or posterior. But if we must trace their origin, we are obliged to say that principle is prior. However, principle is not a separate entity. It exists right in material force” (“Principle [Li] and Material Force [Ch’i],” in Source Book, trans. Chan, 634).

17. Chen Beixi, Neo-Confucian Terms Explained: The Pei-hsi tzu-i, trans. Wing-tsit Chan (New York: Columbia University Press, 1986), 110. The Classic of Changes states, “‘The successive movement of yin and yang constitutes the Way.’ Yin and yang are material forces and are below physical form. The Way is principle. It is simply the principle of yin and yang and is above physical form.”

18. Chen Beixi said: “Physical nature is spoken of in terms of endowment with material force, while the nature of Heaven and Earth is spoken of in terms of the great foundation [principle]. In reality, the nature of Heaven and Earth is not separated from physical nature. The idea is to distinguish the nature of Heaven and Earth from physical nature” (Neo-Confucian Terms Explained, 54).

19. Zhu Zhi said: “The nature of man and things is nothing but principle and cannot be spoken of in terms of integration and disintegration. That which integrates to produce life and disintegrates to produce death is only material force…. As to principle, fundamentally it does not exist or cease to exist because of such integration or disintegration” (“Principle [Li] and Material Force [Ch’i],” in Source Book, trans. Chan, 637–638).

20. Zhou Dunyi said: “‘The state of absolute quiet and inactivity’ is sincerity…. Sincerity is infinitely pure and hence evident…. The sage is one who is in the state of sincerity” (“Sagehood,” in Tongshu [Penetrating the Classic of Changes], in Source Book, trans. Chan, 467). He also said: “The sage settles these affairs by the principles of the Mean, correctness, humanity, and rightness (for the way of the sage is none other than these four), regarding tranquility as fundamental. (Having no desire, there will therefore be tranquility)” (“An Explanation of the Diagram of the Great Ultimate,” in ibid., 463).

21. Li Yanping, Yanping dawen [Dialogues with Yanping], ed. Okada Takehiko, Kinsei kanseki sōkan, shisōhen, 8:9–13, 64–65, 114. Quiet sitting was a practice of self-cultivation taught to Zhu Xi by Li Yanping, a student of the Cheng brothers.

22. “Treatise on the Symbols,” in Book of Changes, trans. Legge, 256; The I Ching, or Book of Changes, trans. Richard Wilhelm and, from the German, Cary F. Baynes, Bollingen Series 19 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1967), 653; A Concordance to Yi ching, Harvard-Yenching Institute Sinological Index Series, supplement no. 10 (Taibei: Chinese Materials and Research Aids Service Center, 1973), 32: “When one’s movements and restings all take place at the proper time for them, one’s way of proceeding is brilliant and intelligent.”

23. Chen Beixi said: “The mind is the master of the body because it possesses an unobstructed intelligent consciousness” (Neo-Confucian Terms Explained, 56).

24. Cheng Yi, Yi shu [Surviving Works of Yiquan], in Er Cheng quanshu [Complete Works of the Cheng Brothers] (Kyoto: Chūbun shuppansha, 1979), chap. 16, 455.

25. Qin dynasty (221–207 B.C.E.).

26. For a discussion of Zhu Xi’s views on the Classic of Changes, see Zhang Liwen, “An Analysis of Zhu Xi’s System of Thought of I,” in Chu Hsi and Neo-Confucianism, ed. Wing-tsit Chan (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1986), 292–311.

27. Lu Yu (hao, Fangweng; zi, Wuguan; 1125–1210) was a poet of the Song dynasty. For a brief account of his life, see D. R. Jonker, “Lu Yu,” in Sung Biographies, ed. Herbert Franke (Wiesbaden: Steiner, 1976), 2:691–704. For the quote, see Lu Yu, Weinan wenji, 29.

28. “He who tries to be sincere is one who chooses the good and holds fast to it” (“Doctrine of the Mean,” in Source Book, trans. Chan, 107).

29. “The Way of learning to be great (or adult education) consists in manifesting the clear character, loving the people, and abiding in the highest good” (“The Great Learning,” in ibid., 86).

30. “Confucius said, ‘Shun was indeed a man of great wisdom! He loved to question others and to examine their words, however ordinary…. This was how he became Shun (the sage-emperor)’” (“Doctrine of the Mean,” in ibid., 99).

31. “Shuoshan xun” [Explaining Mountains], in Huainanzi [The Art of Rulership], Kokuyaku kanbun taisei, keishi shibu (Tokyo: Tōyō bunka kyōkai, 1955), 11:419.

32. “Biography of Liu Liang,” in Hou Han shu [History of the Later Han Dynasty] (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1966), chap. 80B, 2635.

33. Analects 15:39.

34. “The Great Appendix,” in Book of Changes, trans. Legge, 389.

35. The Six Classics are the Classic of Changes (Yijing), Classic of Documents (Shujing), Classic of Odes (Shijing), Spring and Autumn Annals (Chunqiu), Record of Rites (Liji), and Record of Music (Yueji [not extant]).

36. “Great Appendix,” in Book of Changes, trans. Legge, 355.

37. Cheng Yi interpreted the phrase in the Classic of Changes as follows: “The Way is not the same as yin and yang but that by which yin and yang succeed each other. It is like Change, which is the succession of closing (contracting) and opening (expanding)” (“Selected Sayings,” in Source Book, trans. Chan, 552). Zhu Xi also adopted this interpretation, which led to the view of ma terial force as separate from principle. Principle, which is inherent in yin and yang, is one, and material objects produced by them are the other. Ekken opposed this interpretation; he regarded material force and principle as one entity.

38. Zhu Xi equivocated on this issue. While he sometimes stated that “principle is not a separate entity. It exists right in material force” (“Principle [Li] and Material Force [Ch’i],” in Source Book, trans. Chan, 634), he also remarked, “What are called principle and material force are certainly two different entities” (637). Ekken disagreed with the latter claim.

39. According to Zhu Xi, “Fundamentally principle and material force cannot be spoken of as prior or posterior. But if we must trace their origin, we are obliged to say that principle is prior” (ibid., 634). Here, Zhu Xi equivocated, stating that on the one hand, principle and material force cannot be spoken of in terms of priority or posteriority. However, Ekken disagreed with his final statement that principle is prior.

40. “In antiquity the sages wrote the Book of Changes, … in founding the way of heaven, they spoke of yin and yang” (“Discourse on the Trigrams,” in Book of Changes, trans. Legge, 423).

41. Zhu Xi said: “The nature of human beings and things is nothing but principle and cannot be spoken of in terms of integration and disintegration. That which integrates to produce life and disintegrates to produce death is only material force and what we call the spirit, the soul and consciousness are all effects of material force” (“Principle and Material-Force,” in Sources of Chinese Tradition, ed. de Bary and Bloom, 1:701).

42. Yi T’oegye (1501–1570), an orthodox Neo-Confucian scholar in Korea whose ideas strongly influenced thinkers in the Yi dynasty, compiled Record of Self-Reflections, a collection of letters written to his students. See T’oegye chonso [The Complete Works of Yi Hwang], 5 vols. (Seoul: Songgyun’gwan University Press, 1986).

43. Analects 1:14: “A gentleman associates with those who possess the Way and thereby corrects his faults.”

44. Ekken’s view differs from that of Zhu Xi, who says principle is not destroyed (“Principle and Material-Force,” in Sources of Chinese Tradition, ed. de Bary and Bloom, 1:701).

45. Cheng I (Cheng Yi), “Selected Sayings,” in Source Book, trans. Chan, 569. Zhu Xi also supported the view that “human nature is principle” (Reflections on Things at Hand, 28–29). Zhu distinguished the original mind as good. When it is aroused and expresses itself in feelings, good and evil arise. One’s original nature is based on principle and is always good. However, one’s capacity is based on qi, which is not always clear. Thus capacity may be good or evil.

46. “What Heaven (Tian, Nature) imparts to man is called human nature” (“Doctrine of the Mean,” in Source Book, trans. Chan, 98).

47. Mencius 7A:38. References here and subsequently are to Mencius, trans. D. C. Lau (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1970).

48. Zisi (483–402? B.C.E.), a grandson of Confucius, is considered to be the author of the Doctrine of the Mean, as is suggested by the Guodian materials.

49. Jie, the last king of the Xia dynasty, indulged his wife at the expense of the people. He was subjugated by King Tang of the Shang.

50. The last king of the Shang dynasty, Zhu Zhou, lived a decadent life. Because of this, he could not win the people’s support and was killed by King Wu of the Zhou. Zhou is regarded as a prototype of a tyrant.

51. Zi Yue was a man of the Spring and Autumn period. See Zuozhuan zhushu [Commentaries on Zuozhuan], SBBY, 21:11b.

52. This is in contrast to original nature, which is perfectly good. Physical nature may be directed toward evil when material force is received in its state of obscurity or obstruction.

53. Confucius made this distinction about human nature and practice: “By nature men are alike. Through practice they have become far apart” (Analects 17:2, in Source Book, trans. Chan, 45).

54. Emperor Yang (569–618), the son of Emperor Wen of the Sui dynasty, killed his father and tyrannized the people.

55. Luo Qinshun (1465–1547), a Neo-Confucian scholar of the Ming era, explains this theory in Kunzhiji. See Knowledge Painfully Acquired: The K’unchih chi by Lo Ch’in-shun, trans. Irene Bloom (New York: Columbia University Press, 1987), 23.

56. Mencius 6B:2.

57. Analects 17:2. According to Confucius, the essence of human nature does not vary greatly; each person becomes different depending on acquired habits and customs.

58. Analects 17:3.

59. Boyi was an upright gentleman of the late Shang period. He attempted to dissuade King Wu of the Zhou from executing the tyrant Zhou of the Shang, thinking it not permissible for a retainer to put his sovereign to death. However, his admonishments were rejected. He refused the offer of a stipend and went into hiding in the mountains, where he lived on brackens and eventually starved to death. See Mencius 2A:9 and Records of the Historian: Chapters from the Shih Chi of Ssu-ma Ch’ien, trans. Burton Watson (New York: Columbia University Press, 1969), 11–15.

60. Liuxia Hui was a wise man of the Spring and Autumn period. He was not ashamed of serving a prince with a bad reputation, nor did he disdain a modest post. See Mencius 2A:9.

61. Mencius said: “Boyi was too straight-laced; Liuxia Hui was not dignified enough” (ibid.).

62. This idea of opening up the sages’ teaching for future scholars is essential to Ekken’s own goals, which he sees as closer to those of Confucius than to those of some of the later Neo-Confucians.

63. “Recent times” refers to the Yuan, Ming, and early Qing periods.

64. “New learning” refers to Neo-Confucianism after the Song era.

65. “Classical learning” refers to Confucianism before the Song era.

66. In the later Ming period, many Confucians were under the influence of Wang Yangming’s teaching, which emphasized innate knowledge, or “good knowing.” Self-perfection consisted of remaining true to this innate sense of right and wrong. They thus rejected exhaustive investigation into the principles of things external to the mind, or the prolonged study of the classics.

67. Analects 17:24.

68. Analects 15:7.

69. Xu Weichang (171–218) was a poet of the Later Han.

70. Quoted in “Gui yan” [Valuing One’s Words], in Zhonglun [Discussion of Centrality], Zhongguo zixuan mingzhu jicheng, 30:192.

71. Conversations of the States [Guoyu] (Shanghai: Shanghai guji chubanshe, 1978), 92. The work, whose authorship is ascribed to Zuo Qiuming (fifth century B.C.E.), is a history of the Spring and Autumn period in twenty-one volumes.

72. Mencius 7B:15.

73. Mencius 1A:7.

74. Zhang Zai said: “If one has doubt in the search for truth, wash away old opinions and arrive at new ones” (Zhangzi quanshu [Complete Works of Zhang Zai], SBBY, 7:3b).

75. “Great Appenix,” in Book of Changes, trans. Legge, 349.

76. “If it is easy to follow, it obtains good results” (ibid.).

77. Mencius 6B:2.

78. Ibid.

79. A poem written by a Chan Buddhist priest, Xuanjue (d. 713), of the Tang says: “To enter the sphere of Nyorai Buddha [Enlightenment] with one step” (Yongjia zhengdao ge [Taipei: Foguang wenhua shiye youxian gongsi, 1997]).

80. Analects 15:7.

81. “No one is without faults. To correct one’s faults is the greatest goodness” (“Xuan Gong,” in Chunqiu Zuozhuan jijie [Shanghai: Shanghai guji chubanshe, 1978], 539).

82. “Great Appendix,” in Book of Changes, trans. Legge, 355.

83. Ibid.

84. Zhu Xi said: “What are called principle and material force are certainly two different entities. But considered from the standpoint of things, the two entities are merged one with the other and cannot be separated with each in a different place. However, this does not destroy the fact that the two entities are each an entity in itself” (“Principle [Li] and Material Force [Ch’i],” in Source Book, trans. Chan, 637).

85. Analects 17:2.

86. “What Heaven (Tian, Nature) imparts to man is called human nature” (“Doctrine of the Mean,” in Source Book, trans. Chan, 98).

87. Mencius 7A:38.

88. Mencius 6A:2.

89. Mencius 2A:6.

90. Dong Zhongshu (179–104 B.C.E.), a scholar of the Former Han, contributed greatly to the formulation of Han Confucianism. He believed the original nature of human beings had the potential for good but was not yet actually good. Humans would gain actual goodness under the transforming and civilizing influence of the rulers’ teachings. See Dong Zhongshu, “An In-Depth Examination of Names and Designations,” in Sources of Chinese Tradition, ed. de Bary and Bloom, 1:304, and, for his biography, Han shu [History of the Former Han Dynasty], SBBY, 56:4a.

91. In the opening paragraph of the Commentary on Mencius 3A:1, Zhu Xi says: “The nature of Yao and Shun is not different from that of ordinary people from the outset” (Sishu zhangju jizhu, 251).

92. The word wuji was first employed by Laozi and became popular through Zhou Dunyi’s phrase “the wuji and also the taiji” in “An Explanation of the Diagram of the Supreme Ultimate” (“Explanation of the Diagram of the Supreme Polarity,” in Sources of Chinese Tradition, ed. de Bary and Bloom, 1:673). Zhu Xi accepted the concept of wuji and explained taiji by means of wuji, whereas Lu Xiangshan denied the idea of wuji. Ekken supported Lu’s position, although he also had respect for Zhu Xi’s philosophy.

93. In the Explanation on Penetrating the Classic of Changes, Zhu Xi wrote: “Yin and yang are material forces. They are the concrete things below form. The basis for yin and yang is principle. It is above form. The Way is the principle” (Zhou Dunyi ji [Collected Writings of Zhou Dunyi] [Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1990], 13).

94. The nature of Heaven and Earth is also called an original nature or a heavenly destined nature. This is based on a passage from Zhang Zai, Zhengmeng (Correcting Youthful Ignorance): “After form is taken, a physical nature comes into being. When it is successfully changed, there exists a nature of Heaven and Earth” (Zhang Zai ji [Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1978], 23; “Enlightenment Resulting from Sincerity,” in Source Book, trans. Chan, 511). “With the existence of physical form, there exists physical nature. If one skillfully returns to the original nature endowed by Heaven and Earth, then it will be preserved.” Zhu Xi claimed there is a nature of Heaven and Earth and a physical nature. Ekken was, on the other hand, against distinguishing a physical nature from the nature of Heaven and Earth.

95. Zhu Xi, Reflections on Things at Hand, 28.

96. Zhuzi wenji [Collection of Literary Works of Zhu Xi], Kinsei kanseki sōkan, shisōhen, 14:2914.

97. It is said there were three thousand disciples of Confucius, of whom only seventy were principal.

98. “Later scholars” refers to Ekken’s contemporaries.

99. Ekken seems to be referring to the Song Confucians, especially the Cheng brothers and Zhu Xi.

100. “Earlier sages” refers to Confucius and Mencius.

101. “Heterodox scholars … Ming” refers to followers of the Wang Yangming school.

102. Analects 6:13: “You should be a true scholar. You must not be a petty scholar.”

103. In “An Explanation of the Diagram of the Great Ultimate,” Zhou characterized the Supreme Ultimate as nonfinite (Source Book, trans. Chan, 463–465).

104. Zhu Xi wrote that “Zhou Dunyi got to know the secret which had not been transmitted since the age of the sages” (Zhuzi wenji, SBBY, 36:9a).

105. Lu Xiangshan said: “When Zhou Dunyi wrote Penetrating the Classic of Changes, he did not talk about wuji. In my opinion, this is because he already knew the idea of wuji was wrong” (Lu Jiuyuan ji [Collected Works of Lu Xiangshan] [Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1980], 22–23). Lu is quoting the view of his brother, Lu Jiushao.

106. Chou Tun-i (Zhou Dunyi), “Penetrating the Book of Changes,” in Source Book, trans. Chan, 465–480.

107. Shao Yong, “Zhi luan yin,” in Yi quan ji rangji [Collected Poems of Shao Yong], 16:6b, in Siku quanshu (Taipei: Shangwu yinshuguan, 1983– 1986). Shao Yong (960–1127) was a Confucian of the Northern Song period.

108. Zizhang wrote: “He who sides with moral force but only to a limited extent, who believes in the Way, but without conviction, how can one count him as with us, how can one count him as not with us?” (Analects 19:2).

109. In “An Explanation of the Diagram of the Great Ultimate,” Zhou Dunyi stated that by holding to tranquility one establishes the highest moral model for the human. One is required to have no selfish desires in order to be tranquil (Source Book, trans. Chan, 463).

110. The Song Confucians believed that when Confucius said, “By nature close together; by practice set apart” (Analects 17:2), he was referring to physical nature, whereas Mencius was referring to the nature of Heaven and Earth when he said, “Human nature is good” (Mencius 6A:2).

111. Su Shi (1036–1101) was a literatus of the Northern Song period.

112. Su Shi’s thought reflected the influence of Buddhism and Daoism and was quite liberal. Because of these characteristics scholars of the Cheng-Zhu school regarded him as heterodox.

113. From the period of the Three Kingdoms to the Jin dynasty, the Daoist transcendentalist philosophy became very popular. The Confucians felt that during this time people loved to discuss lofty subjects and thus ignored decorum and moral thinking. That trend resulted in social disorder and so was condemned. This kind of sophist thinking was labeled qingtan and disparaged as rhetoric over substance.

114. Luo Qinshun, the author of Kunzhiji (Knowledge Painfully Acquired), questioned Wang’s theory about the innate knowledge of the good and Zhu Xi’s ideas on principle and material force.

115. Luo, Knowledge Painfully Acquired, 173.

116. Ibid., 134.

117. Xue Xuan (1389–1464), a Ming scholar of Zhu Xi, emphasized self-cultivation and practice. He wrote Record of My Reading (twenty-three volumes).

118. Hu Juren (1434–1484) was a Ming scholar of Zhu Xi who served as a director of the Academy of the White Deer Hollow. He emphasized abiding in reverence and observed the orthodoxy of the Cheng-Zhu school, although he revised Zhu’s ideas on principle and material force. He is the author of Rec ord of Occupying One’s Sphere of Activity (eight volumes).

119. Source unknown.

120. “A few people” refers to the Cheng brothers and Zhu Xi.

121. Mencius 7B:3.

122. King Wu and his brother, the duke of Zhou, were sons of King Wen.

123. The Classic of Documents records that “the tyrant Zhou wielded his power excessively” (Shu King, trans. Legge, 296). In Mencius 1B:8, King Zhou is referred to as “the fellow Zhou (who outrages the benevolent and righteous).”

124. Boyi and Shuqi, known for their wisdom, were brothers of the early Zhou era. See Mencius 2A:9; Ssu-ma Ch’ien (Sima Qian), Records of the Historian, 11–15; and note 61.

125. Mencius said that Boyi was a pure one among the sages (Mencius 5B:1).

126. Analects 6:16.

127. Ch’eng Hao, “Selected Sayings,” in Source Book, trans. Chan, 535. The quote is from the Complete Works of the Cheng Brothers, where it is recorded that “a gentleman rectifies the inner heart by having reverence and the exterior becomes moral by having rightness” (Cheng Hao, Yi shu, in Er Cheng quanshu, chap. 5, 278).

128. The word kūjaku is commonly used for the Hinayana type of nirvana.

129. Mushoju (nonabiding) is a state of mind free from any thought of attachment.

130. Analects 12:10.

131. Analects 7:24. Confucius highlighted four subjects in his teaching: culture, moral conduct, loyalty, and faithfulness.

132. “Scholars of the Way” refers to the Neo-Confucians of the Song dynasty.

133. Analects 1:2.

134. “The Way of the superior man may be compared to traveling to a distant place: one must start from the nearest point. It may be compared to ascending a height: one must start from below” (“Doctrine of the Mean,” in Source Book, trans. Chan, 102).

135. Zhuzi yulei, chap. 139, 1480. A Chan priest of the Tang, Zhaozhou Congshen, said: “Sit for twenty or thirty years to plumb principle. If not enlightened, cut off the head of an old priest.”

136. Ibid., chap. 115, 4411. After the Tang period, the phrase was frequently used by Chan priests. This saying is recorded in Dahui Zonggao, Biyan lu (Blue Cliff Records).

137. Ibid., chap. 83, 3421.

138. This phrase appears in Zhou Dunyi’s “Explanation of the Diagram of the Supreme Ultimate,” but not in Huayan fajie guan (Huayan View of the Realm of the Dharmas), by Dushun (557–640), the founder of the Huayan school of Buddhism. See Zhu Xi, Reflections on Things at Hand, 5n.2.

139. This assertion alludes to why Zhu accepted Zhou’s use of the Diagram of the Supreme Ultimate to explain cosmology, namely taiji and wuji.

140. The phrase is used by Cheng Yi in his preface to Yiquan yizhuan (Commentary on the Classic of Changes) (“Selected Sayings,” in Source Book, trans. Chan, 570n.124). Chan notes that the first half of this phrase is attributed to Cheng Guan (ca. 760–838), but it does not actually appear in his writing. Chan suggests that the saying was common among both Buddhists and Confucians by the eleventh century.

141. Cheng Guan, the fourth patriarch of the Huayan sect and the author of Huayan jing shu (Commentary on the Huayan Sutra), was said to have been the most scholarly priest of the Tang period.

142. Analects 4:7.

143. The Cheng brothers said: “The Way is open to all” (Er Cheng quanshu, vol. 40).

144. Analects 12:20. In replying to Zizhang, Confucius said that a man who tries to win fame pretends to be benevolent, but his conduct is contrary to his outward benevolence. Nevertheless, he is self-assured and never doubts himself. Here he is contrasting being famous with being influential.

145. “Great Appendix,” in Book of Changes, trans. Legge, 348.

146. “Explanation of the Divination Signs” states: “The Way of Heaven is defined as yin and yang; The Way of Earth is defined as hard and soft” (Book of Changes, trans. Legge, 423).

147. “The Great Appendix” says: “Heaven is high, earth is low; thus the Creative and the Receptive are determined” (Book of Changes, trans. Legge, 348).

148. “Explanation of the Divination Signs,” in Book of Changes, trans. Legge, 423.

149. During the Han period, yin was related to the idea of femaleness and yang came to connote maleness. The Book of Changes, in “Appended Judgments,” says: “Male and female energies are joined and this causes growth in all things.”

150. “Explanation of the Divination Signs,” in Book of Changes, trans. Legge, 423.

151. Er Cheng quanshu, vol. 12. Ekken disagrees with the Cheng brothers’ interpretation of yin and yang as being below form.

152. The Book of Changes, in “Appended Judgments,” says: “Yin and yang are all below form.”

153. “The Sage” refers to Confucius.

154. “Two forms” refers to yin and yang. See “Appended Judgments,” in Book of Changes, trans. Legge.

155. Chan translates this passage: “The Ultimate of Non-being and also the Great Ultimate (T’ai-chi)” (Chou Tun-i [Zhou Dunyi], “Explanation of the Diagram of the Great Ultimate,” in Source Book, trans. Chan, 463). I have chosen to translate wuji as “nonfinite” and taiji as “Supreme Ultimate.” Joseph Adler translates these terms as “Non-Polar” and “Supreme Polarity” (Zhou Dunyi, “Explanation of the Diagram of the Supreme Polarity,” in Sources of Chinese Tradition, ed. de Bary and Bloom, 1:673).

156. Zhuzi wenji, SBBY, 36:9b.

157. Laozi, in Source Book, trans. Chan, 160.

158. Zhu Xi says in this work: “The terms wuji and taiji simply explain that principle exists without form” (Zhuzi yulei, chap. 94, 4904).

159. Lu Jiuyuan ji, vol. 2.

160. “Appended Judgments,” in Book of Changes, trans. Legge.

161. The reference is to Confucius in “Appended Judgments,” in Book of Changes.

162. Lu Jiuyuan ji, vol. 2.

163. Zhu Zifa (Zhu Zhen, 1072–1138) was a Confucian of the Northern Song period.

164. Mu Bozhang (Mu Xiu, 979–1032) and Chen Xiyi (Chen Tuan, ca. 906–989) were Daoists of the Northern Song period. For accounts of their lives, see Sung Biographies, ed. Franke, 2:793–794, 120–123.

165. Laozi, in Source Book, trans. Chan, 154.

166. There is actually no phrase corresponding to “the nonfinite and also the Supreme Ultimate” in the Huayan fajie guan. See Zhu Xi, Reflections on Things at Hand, 5n.2.

167. Here, too, Ekken is mistaken. See ibid.

168. Laozi, in Source Book, trans. Chan, 139.

169. Ibid., 160.

170. Wang Ziquan was a Confucian scholar of the early Qing. The quotation is from his book Discussion on an Explanation of the Diagram of the Supreme Ultimate.

171. Shouya was a Chan priest of the Northern Song period. Details about him are unknown.

172. Zhu Xi stated: “I think the excellence of Zhou’s teachings lies in the Diagram. All the words in Penetrating the Classic of Changes are to develop the abstruse meaning of the Diagram” (Zhuzi wenji, SBBY, 75:18a). Thus Zhu Xi’s position differs from that of Ekken, who separated the Diagram from Penetrating the Classic of Changes and regarded “An Explanation of the Diagram of the Supreme Ultimate” as an unfinished manuscript from Zhou’s early years.

173. Ekken read Hao’s text at age seventy and was confirmed in his reservations about Zhu Xi’s metaphysics and affirmed his interest in the philosophy of qi. See Okada Takehiko, “Practical Learning in the Chu Hsi School: Yamazaki Ansai and Kaibara Ekken,” in Principle and Practicality: Essays in Neo-Confucianim and Practical Learning, ed. Wm. Theodore de Bary and Irene Bloom (New York: Columbia University Press, 1979), 266, 288.

174. Chen Tuan was a Daoist of the Northern Song period who, according to tradition, lived at the foot of Mount Hua and practiced “ecstatic sleep.” Zhou Dunyi reportedly knew of him and derived ideas about the concept of taiji from him.

175. Hu Wengong (Hu Su, 996–1067) was a Confucian of the Northern Song period.

176. Runzhou is located in present-day Jiangsu Province.

177. Zhang Jingfu (Zhang Shi, 1133–1180) was a scholar of the Southern Song period and a friend of Zhu Xi. The source of the attributed quotation is unknown.

178. Hao Jing (1558–1639), Shixi xinzhi (Jinan: Qi-Lu shushe chubanshe, 1997), vol. 6. However, the last sentence is a summary of the original, which states: “Most [philosophical] Confucians are refined and lofty. They are, of course, very wise. However, a Chan flavor pervades their scholarly style. This is not the correct transmission of the teaching of Confucius and Mencius.”

179. Zhuzi yulei, chap. 1, 139.

180. Ibid., chap. 1, 144.

181. Analects 12:1.

182. Mencius 4A:9.

183. Er Cheng quanshu, chap. 2, 36.

184. Zhuzi yulei, chap. 41, 2303. For a biography of Yang Shi (1053–1135), see Sung Biographies, ed. Franke, 2:1226–1230.

185. Lü Dalin, Inscription of Disciplining Oneself, in Song Yuan xue’an [Anthology of Philosophers of the Song and Yuan], SBBY, 31:8a. For an account of his life, see Sung Biographies, ed. Franke, 2:739–741.

186. In Western Inscription, Zhang Zai stressed that human beings are one with all creation and that ethics should be united with cosmic order. See Zhang Zai, “The ‘Western Inscription,’” in Sources of Chinese Tradition, ed. de Bary and Bloom, 1:682–684.

187. Zhu Xi, Lunyu jizhu [Commentary on the Analects] (Taipei: Zhonghua congshu weiyuanhui, 1958), 7:216.

188. Wang Mang (45 B.C.E–23 C.E.), a Han politician, usurped the throne of the Han dynasty and established the Xin dynasty; after fifteen years on the throne, he himself was overthrown. See Han shu, chap. 99.

189. Tai Bo, an uncle of King Wen of the Zhou, renounced his right of succession to the throne in favor of his brother. Confucius said: “Of Tai Bo it should be said that he is outstanding in virtue. No less than three times he renounced the sovereignty of all things under Heaven, but no one praised him” (Analects 8:1).

190. In their youth, the Cheng brothers studied under the supervision of Zhou Dunyi.

191. Analects 13:24.

192. Analects 12:1.

193. Analects 12:20.

194. Analects 12:20: “He who achieves a deep understanding is by nature straightforward and loves rightness. He examines others’ words, observes their expressions and bears in mind the necessity of being humble to others. Such a person will certainly achieve a deep understanding, whether employed by the state or by a ruling family.”

195. Analects 14:37.

196. Kong Yingda (576–648). See Shangshu zhushu [Commentaries on the Classic of Documents], SBBY, 12:8b.

197. Ibid., vol. 6.

198. Zhuzi wenji, SBBY, 59:17a.

199. Zhu Xi was critical of the position of Yang Shi and Lü Dalin. He said their explanations were too lofty and lose the meaning of the sages. Ekken found this unreasonable.

200. In Guoyu, it is said: “Caution is something which can protect virtue” (chap. 3, 98). Ekken replaced “caution” with “reverence.”

201. In Zuo’s Commentary on the Spring and Autumn Annals, it is stated: “Reverence is something which can foster virtue. If one reveres well, one certainly attains virtue which regulates the people” (The Ch’un Ts’ew with the Tso Chuen, vol. 5 of The Chinese Classics, trans. James Legge [Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 1960], 223).

202. “Doctrine of the Mean,” in Source Book, trans. Chan, 108.

203. In Daxue huowen (Questions and Answers on the Great Learning), Zhu Xi states: “The practice of reverence is the first meaning for the Gate of the Sages. It must be practiced thoroughly without any interruption” (Kinsei kanseki sōkan, shisō sanben, chap. 5, 4). For Neo-Confucians, the practice of reverence should be based on awe and obedience to the Heavenly Principle, which consequently leads one to serious, solemn appearance and attitude. The practice, however, tended to emphasize only seriousness and severity and result in the formation of a cold, inhumane personality. Ekken strongly opposed this tendency toward severity in the practice of reverence.

204. Ibid.

205. Analects 14:45.

206. Mencius 6A:8: “Confucius said, ‘Hold on to it and it will remain; let go of it, and it will disappear. One never knows the time it comes or goes, neither does one know the direction.’ It is perhaps the heart this refers to.”

207. “People who flatter Zhu Xi” refers to the scholars of the Yamazaki Ansai school.

208. Analects 12:10.

209. “Sincerity is the Way of heaven. To think how to be sincere is the Way of man” (“Doctrine of the Mean,” in Source Book, trans. Chan, 107).

210. “Explanation of the Words and Sentences,” in Book of Changes, trans. Legge.

211. Er Cheng quanshu, vol. 53.

212. “The Canon of Yao,” in Shu King, trans. Legge, 15.

213. “The Canon of Shun,” in ibid., 29.

214. “Counsels of the Great Yu,” in ibid., 52.

215. “Long Manifested,” in The She King, vol. 4 of The Chinese Classics, ed. James Legge (Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 1960), 640.

216. “King Wen,” in ibid., 429.

217. “Wu Wang Jiangzu,” in Da Dai liji [Elder Dai’s Record of Rites], in Kungzi wenhua daquan (Jinan: Shandong youyi shushe, 1991), 6:1b, 120.

218. Tai Gong rendered distinguished service to King Wu and King Wen of the Zhou.

219. Analects 14:45.

220. “Summary of the Rites,” in Li Chi: Book of Rites, trans. James Legge (New Hyde Park, N.Y.: University Books, 1967), 1:61.

221. Er Cheng quanshu, 12:393.

222. Confucius said: “In Heaven there are not two suns. For the people there are not two kings” (Mencius 5A:4).

223. Analects 17:12.

224. This is the premise of the “Doctrine of the Mean,” in Source Book, trans. Chan, 107–110.

225. “Explanation of the Divination Signs,” in Book of Changes, trans. Legge.

226. “Wisdom, humaneness and courage, these three are the universal virtues, the way by which they are practiced is one” (“Doctrine of the Mean,” in Source Book, trans. Chan, 105).

227. Zhu Xi, “On the Substance of the Way,” in Reflections on Things at Hand, 5–8.

228. “The Little Min” (Xiao min), in She King, trans. Legge, 333.

229. “Long Manifested,” in ibid., 433.

230. “Doctrine of the Mean,” in Source Book, trans. Chan, 98.

231. “Di zi zhi,” in Guanzi [Collection of the Words of Guan Zhong and His Students], Kokuyaku kanbun taisei, keishi shibu (Tokyo: Tōyō bunka kyōkai, 1955), 18:597. Guan Zhong (d. 645 b.C.E.) was a statesman of the Spring and Autumn period and consolidated the power of the Ji kingdom.

232. Zhuzi yulei, vol. 15.

233. Quoted in Zhu Xi, Reflections on Things at Hand, 57. Sun Simiao (601–682), the author of Qianjin fang, was a Daoist hermit who lived during the Tang.

234. Mencius 2A:2.

235. Ibid.

236. Analects 7:4: “In his leisure hours, Confucius was free and easy and his expression alert and cheerful.”

237. Chang Tsai (Zhang Zai), “Great Harmony,” in Source Book, trans. Chan, 501.

238. Luo, Knowledge Painfully Acquired, 127.

239. Laozi, in Source Book, trans. Chan, 156.

240. Chuang Tzu: Basic Writings, trans. Burton Watson (New York: Columbia University Press, 1996), 135.

241. The Cheng brothers and Zhu Xi interpreted the words in the Classic of Changes (“yin and yang are the Way”) as “the source for yin and yang are the Way.” In this interpretation, yin and yang are separated from principle, and principle is thus regarded as something empty and void.

242. “Doctrine of the Mean,” in Source Book, trans. Chan, 110.

243. Luo, Knowledge Painfully Acquired, 173.

244. This may be a misreading of Zhu Xi and Lü Zuqian as seen in Reflections on Things at Hand, in which Lü indicated that “if the shadow proceeds accordingly, ascending from low to the high and going from the near to the far, he will probably not miss the aim of this anthology” (3).

245. Laozi, in Source Book, trans. Chan, 152.

246. “Appended Judgments,” in Book of Changes, trans. Legge.

247. In the Classic of Changes, it says that the Supreme Ultimate refers to one primal material force before a distinction is made between Heaven and Earth. See I Ching, trans. Wilhelm and Baynes, 318.

248. “Appended Judgments,” in Book of Changes, trans. Legge.

249. Ibid.

250. Ibid.

251. In chapter 2 of the Classified Conversations of Zhu Xi, it is written: “Question: Which exists first, principle or material force? Answer: Principle has never been separated from material force. However, principle is above form. On the other hand, material force is below form. Hence when spoken of as being above or below form, how is there a difference of priority and posteriority?” (Zhuzi yulei, 142).

252. Laozi, in Source Book, trans. Chan, 152.

253. It is said that Zhou Dunyi learned these ideas from a Northern Song Buddhist monk, Shouya. These ideas assume the existence of an Absolute beyond concrete phenomena, a position with which Ekken disagreed.

254. Material force has power that creates all things through its orderly operation, and the order itself is principle. Hence Ekken asserts principle also has a power that creates all things.

255. Postulating that material force and principle are originally one, Ekken concluded that material force cannot be created from principle.

256. Liu Shuwen, whose birth name was Liu Yi (awarded the jinshi degree in 1193), was a friend of Zhu Xi. The jinshi degree was awarded upon the successful completion of a special imperial examination.