Organizer and Chair: Hoyt Cleveland Tillman, Arizona State University
Discussant: Robert M. Gimello, University of Arizona
Even though progress has been made since the early 1980s in reaching beyond conventional interpretations grounded in the orthodox ‘Confucianism’ of Zhu Xi (1130–1200) as representing the essence of Chinese values, he still remains for most Asianists the doorway to understanding Chinese traditions before and after his era. Twentieth-century efforts to configure Confucianism into a world religion and/or the essence of Chinese values continue to center on Zhu’s rationalistic systematization of the orthodox tradition. Although Hoyt Tillman is often perceived as overly critical of Zhu, most members of this panel are scholars internationally renowned for their positive evaluations of Zhu Xi and their linkage to ‘Neo-Confucian’ circles in North America and East Asia. Yet, each of the panelists is taking a fresh look at Zhu Xi’s relationship to, and borrowings from, diverse traditions beyond the Confucian orthodoxy with which he is equated. Julia Ching explores Zhu’s complex interactions with two distinct Buddhist traditions. Ron-Guey Chu explains Zhu’s image as a master of geomancy. Joseph Adler revisits the reasons for Zhu’s promotion of Zhou Dunyi (Chou Tun-i)—despite associations with religious Daoism. Tillman queries Zhu’s comments on, and usages of, spirits and rites for the dead. Robert Gimello is discussant. The common ground among these panelists with diverse perspectives is a willingness to re-examine Zhu’s relations with other traditions in historical context. Lively discussion should ensue. The panel is cross-disciplinary (religion, history, and philosophy) and includes participants from three countries.
Chu Hsi and Buddhism
Julia Ching, University of Toronto
To what extent, if any, was Chu Hsi influenced by Buddhism? This paper seeks an answer to this question. It begins with the background of Sung Buddhism, especially the Lin-chi and Ts’ao-tung sects, with special attention to the Lin-chi monk Ta-hui Tsung-kao, whose name, together with those of two others, has been associated with Chu’s. After investigating these contacts, the paper moves to Chu’s knowledge of Buddhism, remarking that he knew best Ch’an, in particular Lin-chi and its riddles (kung-an), which at that time, were often very vulgar. It then examines his critiques of Buddhism, noting that these were mixed with positive appraisals made throughout his life. Generally, however, he was more critical of Buddhism than of Taoism, and usually because of Buddhism’s allegedly world-negating attitude and doctrine of emptiness. These critiques were usually made less to belittle Buddhism than to exalt and explain Confucian teachings. The paper concludes with Buddhist influence on Chu’s teachings through a comparison of both the doctrine of reverence to mindfulness and the concept of Buddha-nature with the Great Ultimate and principle. Noting that Chu’s mature philosophy has more in common with Ts’ao-tung than the Lin-chi, which Chu studied as a youth, I point out that the main difference between Chu and Buddhism lies in his moral intentionality and acceptance of social responsibility.
The Interpenetration of Stillness and Activity in Chu Hsi’s Appropriation of Chou Tun-i
Joseph Adler, Kenyon College
The problem of why Chu promoted Chou Tun-i (1017–73) as the first Confucian sage since Mencius has never been solved. Although Chu proclaimed that Chou apprehended the Confucian Way without a teacher and passed it to Cheng Hao and Ch’eng I, Chu’s claim was based on scant evidence, and some of Chu’s contemporaries regarded Chou as having been influenced by Taoism. Given that the Ch’eng brothers’ contributions were absolutely central to Chu’s philosophical synthesis, the fact that they made virtually no use of Chou’s teachings makes Chu’s claim about Chou even more puzzling.
I propose that Chou’s concept of the interpenetration of stillness and activity within yin-yang polarities provided Chu with grounding for the turning point in his philosophical career—his solution to the problem of the cultivation of the mind. Chu’s teacher, Li T’ung, had emphasized mental quietude. Chu later became attracted to Hu Hung’s teaching: since the Way required active moral practice, principle should be sought in the active mind. Eventually Chu achieved a compromise: activity and stillness were not mutually exclusive but rather interpenetrating states. He thus reinterpreted Chou’s doctrine of "emphasizing stillness" in terms of Ch’eng’s concept of "reverent composure," comprehending activity and stillness. But Chu was never satisfied with practical solutions that could not be grounded in metaphysics and cosmology, so he turned to Chou’s discussion of activity and stillness as interpenetrating yin-yang phases of cosmic processes.
Zhu Xi and the Spirits
Hoyt Cleveland Tillman, Arizona State University
Zhu Xi has continually been regarded by most Asianists as the peerless systematic rationalist who so enhanced coherence and unity within Confucian high culture that it was readily accepted as intellectual and state orthodoxy soon after his death in 1200. Nevertheless, I propose that Zhu’s appropriation of the spirits played a crucial role in his ascendancy. For instance, in his dedicatory eulogies for shrines, Zhu addressed the spirits of Kongzi (our Confucius) and other sages in order to evoke reverence for his particular reconfiguration of traditions of the dao (the true Way). By promoting Zhou Dunyi as having revived the sages’ dao by receiving it directly from tian (Heaven) itself, Zhu not only sought to depreciate the writings of centuries of Confucians since Mengzi (our ‘Mencius’), but also to neutralize charges against Zhou for having been contaminated with Daoist ideas. Zhu’s conception of tien incorporated traditionalistic notions of consciousness and authority, so it was not as purely rationalistic as modern champions of his philosophy have claimed. Utilizing geomancy, he challenged the tomb placement of Emperor Xiaocong and thus questioned the filial virtue of the reigning emperor and the wisdom of current officials. In the process of such activities and pronouncements, Zhu was promoting his own status as the sole person of his day who was qualified to be the successor to the sages, the authoritative reader of the classics, and the spokesman for the dao tradition and fellowship.
Chu Hsi as Fung-shui Master: The Secret History of Neo-Confucianism
Ron-Guey Chu, Academia Sinica
This paper highlights the impact of Neo-Confucianism on the common people by examining how Chu Hsi’s thought and status were appropriated by fung-shui masters in major fung-shui texts to lend support to their religious practice of geomancy. In principle, Chu Hsi disapproved of popular religious practices that deviated from Confucian rituals, but in real life he allowed himself to conform with social demands placed on a filial son in arranging burials of his parents according to prevailing fung-shui customs. I will first discuss how Chu Hsi explained his own conduct and then how he was regarded as a theoretical authority in Chinese fung-shui tradition.
There is no secret at all that fung-shui texts give Chu Hsi a prominent place. It is a secret history of Chu Hsi only to the extent that the orthodox or mainline Confucians since Ming Dynasty hardly ever acknowledged this fact. It is perhaps expected that such an influential thinker like Chu Hsi would enjoy a separate, illustrious career in the legends and religious life of the common people. However, I will argue that it is no longer justifiable to separate the Chu Hsi that lived in the lives of the common people from the Chu Hsi that has been embalmed in libraries. To do so will risk anachronism and elitism, both of which, in my view, were inimical to Chu Hsi’s thought.