martedì 22 luglio 2014

Speech notes for BAAS conference 2014


SELF-CULTIVATION ACCORDING TO ZHU XI 朱熹 (1130-1200)
Margus Ott

1. Introduction

First, a historical remark. Song dynasty philosophy of brothers Cheng, Zhu Xi and others has been traditionally called in the West “Neo-Confucianism”[1]. This is a second-level western conceptual elaboration: first, the Chinese rujia is not tied to the name of Confucius as the western term of ‘Confucianism’; second, the Chinese Song-time terms for denoting the movement didn’t refer to rujia[2]. Several terms were used, and one of the most common ones was daoxue 道學 or “learning of the dao”. I prefer to use this term.
I begin with a short introduction to some of the most general terms of Zhu Xi. Then I move to the main topic announced, although for reasons of time and space, this will remain sketchy. And finally I suggest how all this can be relevant today.
Zhu Xi is known for his ontology of li and qi . Li has been translated into English as principle[3], and this translation has been defended also by recent scholars. However, for Song scholars this notion was etymologically explained as “veins of a stone or wood”, i.e. inherent articulations of these materials; and extending from this the li is considered to be the articulation of the whole of reality, and each part of it. And qi is also variously translated by force, matter, material force etc.
In passing, I suggest that this liqi ontology could well be adapted to contemporary thinking. For example, every material object or process has on the one hand a certain energy that keeps it together or keeps it going, and on the other hand a certain articulation into parts or phases: the first aspect would correspond to the qi and the second to the li. So, on the one hand we have a certain force, and on the other hand, a complementary articulation of it. We cannot imagine an utterly un-articulated force, because it somehow has to differentiate from itself, in order to be what it is, i.e. a force. And neither can we imagine an articulation separated from all force – or if we claim that we can, it is indeed merely an abstract knowledge[4]. In Zhu Xi’s terms, “without the qi, the veins would have nothing to adhere to” (Chan 1963: 634, modified).
Now, to move closer to our topic, li and qi have a corresponding aspect in human being, viz. human nature (xing ) and feelings (qing ) These are the two aspects of the human mind: nature is its “substance” (ti ) and feelings are its “function” (yong ). Nature is the mind in the state of quiescence and feelings are the mind in the state of movement.
Human nature implicitly contains in itself all the “veins” or articulations of the world: human nature contains the “heavenly veins” (tianli 天理).[5]
Feelings are altogether natural and justified; the only problem is when they become excessive and fixated to their objects – then they create an excessive flow of qi and are termed “human desires” (renyu 人欲) that are detrimental to the “heavenly veins” contained in our nature.
Human mind (xin ) or intellect (lingchu 靈處) straddles the two, the nature and feelings, and the question is, whether it is capable of coping with the force that it is riding. If so, the heavenly veins can shine through and the mind is adequate. If not, then the mind becomes beclouded by the human desires.


2. Dedication

In the following we shall look more closely at the different aspects of self-cultivation enabled in this structure. Zhu Xi has several different and partially overlapping notions for self-cultivation[6]; I cannot deal with them all, but I present instead a certain systematization of them that could be of use today.
I would group the self-cultivation into two: the first, and in a sense major, way for self-cultivation “returns” to the self. There are several notions that cover this modality; one of the most common of these is “reverence” or “dedication” (jing).
When you have dedication, then:
-       you possess all the veins (敬則萬理具在);
-       the Heavenly Veins are constantly bright and human passions fade away and are governed (敬則天理常明,自然人欲懲窒消治);
-       the mind becomes focused (只敬,則心便一);
-       from the beginning to the end is one thing/activity” (始終一事);
-       this mind becomes dominating (,只是此心自做主宰處);
-       body and mind become collected and concentrated (身心收斂).
Dedication is also compared to standing, as different from the complementary aspect of walking, and to closed eyes, as different from opening them (立定是敬 ... 合目是敬).[7] Then “at no point is the slightest effort exerted, and at no point is the slightest effort not exerted” (無一分著力處,亦無一分不著力處)  (Chan 1963: 606-607).
This means that when we with dedication move towards our nature and the Heavenly Veins contained in it, then correspondingly “human desires”, i.e. excessive feelings fade away. Note, however, that this doesn’t mean any listlessness or insensitivity – on the contrary, a dedicated person is someone who is not shut in any cocoon, but is very sensitive towards the external world and other persons. Zhu Xi doesn’t even condemn passions that are ordinarily seen as negative (especially in Buddhism), like anger:

When Heaven is angry, thunder is also aroused. When sage-emperor Shun executed the four cruel criminals, he must have been angry at that time. When one becomes angry at the right time, he will be acting in the proper degree. When the matter is over, anger disappears, and none of it will be retained. (Chan 1963: 632)

One method to attain the quiescence and concentration required by the dedication, was the daoxuequiet sitting” (jingzuo靜坐), a meditation that was affiliated to Buddhist and Daoist meditations, but whose conceptual place and importance was different. It was an auxiliary method and most daoxue scholars didn’t like to stress it very much, because it would have brought them too close to Buddhism for their liking. Zhu Xi himself practiced quiet sitting diligently and also as an aid for recovering from illness.[8]
That dedication was often confused with just quiet sitting, might be inferred from several Zhu Xi’s responses where he admonishes that it is not just about sitting like a block of stone, free of thoughts.

To be dedicated does not mean to sit still like a blockhead, with the ear hearing nothing, the eye seeing nothing, and the mind thinking of nothing, so that only then it could be called dedication. [Instead,] it is merely to be apprehensive and careful and dare not give free rein to oneself. In this way both body and mind will be collected and concentrated as if one is apprehensive of something. If one can always be like this, his dispositions will naturally be changed. Only when one has succeeded in preserving this mind can he engage in study. (Chan 1963: 607, translation modified.)
敬非是塊然兀坐,耳無所聞,目無所見,心無所思,而後謂之敬。只是有所畏謹,不敢放縱。如此則身心收斂,如有所畏。常常如此,氣象自別。存得此心,乃可以為學。

So it seems that confusion might have been possible – and perhaps even widespread – between “dedication” and meditating with unmoving body and blank mind. It seems that Zhu Xi actually did mean also sitting in meditation (which he himself practiced), but that he stressed focusing of thoughts instead of their absence.[9]

Dedication doesn’t mean that everything stops, but it means to follow the affairs single-mindedly, cautiously and with respect, without ever having a rest.
敬不是萬事休置之謂,只是隨事專一,謹畏,不放逸耳。
Dedication is not just sitting. Standing up or walking around – this mind must constantly be involved in it.
敬不是只恁坐地。舉足動步,常要此心在這襄。

So that motionless quiet sitting is just one part of a more comprehensive effort to retain the same concentration in all of the daily interactions with persons and things.[10]
So, finally, with dedication, you will possess all the veins (敬則萬理具在). When you attain your nature where all the veins are implied, then you attain all the veins of things and processes. This gives rise to appropriateness (yi )[11] that Zhu Xi often presents as complementary to dedication:

Dedication is what is preserved in the self and what doesn’t change.
Appropriateness is what emanates from the other and adapts to the situation.
敬者,守於此而不易之謂;義者,施於彼而合宜之謂。

So, dedicated mind that depends only on the mind itself, gives rise to appropriate behaviour, at the instigation of things and affairs. When the mind is dedicated, it is able to react adequately and appropriately in each situation.

Appropriateness is when things come and you can respond to them, when affairs arrive and you can decide correctly.
義是其間物來能應,事至能斷者是。

So, this first aspect of self-cultivation – reverence, dedication, focusing – moves from the insight into one’s own nature to an intuition of all other things.


3. Investigating things

The other aspect of self-cultivation moves the other way, from things to mind. Again, Zhu Xi has several slightly different terms to denote it: investigation of things (gewu格物), extension of knowledge (zhi zhi 致知), exhausting the veins (qiongli 窮理) and others. The first two of these notions derive from the key text of daoxue learning, the Great Learning. In his commentary[12] to Great Learning, Zhu Xi writes:

Hence, the first step of instruction in greater learning is to teach the student, whenever he encounters anything at all in the world, to build upon what is already known to him of veins and to probe still further, so that one seeks to reach the utmost. After exerting oneself in this way for a long time, one will suddenly find oneself possessed of a wide and far-reaching penetration; then the manifest and the hidden, the subtle and the obvious qualities of all things will all be known, and the mind, in its whole substance and vast operations, will be completely illuminated. This is called “the investigation of things”. This is called “the perfection of knowledge”. (Translation based on Gardner 1986: 104-105 and Zhang 2002: 454)
是以大學始教,必使學者即凡天下之物,莫不因其已知之理而益窮之,以求至乎其極。至於用力之久,而一旦豁然貫通焉,則眾物之表裡精粗無不到,而吾心之全體大用無不明矣。此謂物格,此謂知之至也。(Zhu 2014c)

So, the task is to exert your knowledge in case of every thing, in order to know their essential articulations. After a certain threshold is passed, it has a repercussion on the mind, so that it becomes enlightened.[13] So, as we said, if the first aspect of self-cultivation moved from mind to things, this second aspect moves from things to the mind.
In another place, Zhu Xi makes a distinction between these two notions of gewu and zhizhi:

Shan Bo inquired about the investigation of things and extension of knowledge. Zhu Xi answered: “The investigation of things is to exhaust the utmost veins of every single thing. The extension of knowledge means that in my mind there is nothing that I do not know. The investigation of things explains it in terms of small details, and the extension of knowledge in terms of the whole substance.”
剡伯問格物、致知。曰:「格物,是物物上窮其至理;致知,是吾心無所不知。格物,是零細說;致知,是全體說。」

Or again,

The extension of knowledge is said from the standpoint of myself; the investigation of things is said from the standpoint of things.
致知,是自我而言;格物,是就物而言。

Here the extension of knowledge can be seen as the holistic or subjective counterpart of the empiric research of the investigation of things. And, as we said, at a certain threshold, this extended knowledge becomes an intuitive insight into the heavenly veins in their entirety.
And again, the “exhausting of veins” is sometimes set up as a counterpart to the “dwelling in dedication”:

The effort of learning consists only in these two affairs: “dwelling in dedication” and “exhausting the veins”. These two stimulate each other. Who can exhaust the veins, then his dwelling in dedication daily progresses. Who can dwell in dedication, then his exhausting the veins becomes daily more refined. It is like the two feet of a person: when the left foot makes a step, then the right foot stands in support; when the right foot makes a step, then the left foot stands in support.[14] Or when a thing is suspended in the air and you press it down on the left side, then the right side rises up; or if you press down the right side, the left side rises up. These two are in reality one and the same thing.
學者工夫,唯在居敬、窮理二事。此二事互相發。能窮理,則居敬工夫日益進;能居敬,則窮理工夫日益密。譬如人之兩足,左足行,則右足止;右足行,則左足止。又如一物懸空中,右抑則左昂,左抑則右昂,其實只是一事。

Zhu Xi admits two main sources of investigating things: reading books (dushu 讀書) and handling affairs:

There is no other way to investigate principle to the utmost than to pay attention to everything in our daily reading of books and handling of affairs. Although there may not seem to be substantial progress, nevertheless after a long period of accumulation, without knowing it one will be saturated [with veins] and achieve an extensive harmony and penetration. (Chan 1963: 610-611, slightly modified)

I suppose these two remain the basic sources of knowledge also today, if we extend the meaning of “books” to all sources of cultural knowledge, including films, art performances etc.


4. Contemporary relevance

What is important in the investigation of things is to understand the natural articulations of things, so that we can also match better our respective forces. Originally it, of course, didn’t mean any kind of scientific research. On the contrary, people sometimes took it for another type of meditation, focusing on an object[15], which could be seen as complementary to the “pure” focusing in dedication. It could be argued that the scientific research starts from very different assumptions. Of course, it is important also for science to discover the real (and not only imaginary) articulations of the world, but how the “world” is conceived, is already metaphysically engaged.
In classical science (as developed in the modern era) this meant generally a Cartesian split between the “extended thing” and the “thinking thing”, so that the science explicitly dealt with the extended thing requiring quantitative (and later, statistical) measurements and repetition of experiments. The “thinking thing” was scientifically studied only insofar as it had some quantitative effects in the extension, e.g. in psychiatry.
Another metaphysical assumption regarded the Aristotelian conceptualization of causality and the distinction between “essential” and “accidental”. First, knowledge is defined as knowledge of causes[16], and second, it is important to know what is essential and what is accidental in case of a phenomenon. Essential is that in case of which the thing “remains the same”, while accidents concern only superficial aspects of the phenomenon. Of course it involves a lot of abstraction and artificiality, because the whole universe coheres and every part of it has some influence on all other parts, but for practical scientific research it was for a long time useful to discard most of these influences.
Based on these assumptions (among others) the classical science proved to be practically successful in the sense that with the functions and representations it created, it was possible to build all the technology of the industrial age which has proved its great efficiency in various domains of life.
Now, when we have all this working science in place and when the prestige of science is uncontested (nowadays rather the arts and humanities need a justification for their existence), we might ask, whether the old metaphysical assumptions are not becoming prohibiting and limiting also for scientific knowledge, and whether the incorporation of other ontological possibilities could not open up new vistas for discovery.
In the distinction of li and qi there is no essentialist abstraction. The distinction is not between essence and accident, but between what is important and what is not. We acknowledge the influence of all things and aspects in a phenomenon, but we do not make a clear-cut separation between them, but allow for a graded scale of importance. Then we cease to study an abstract model of the thing (its essence), but we investigate the thing or the process itself in its articulations and interactions (and mathematical tools should be seen as compatible with this view).
And this view would also reconsider the body-mind dualism. First, the veins of my mind and those of things interpenetrate each other. Investigating things I investigate myself, and through dedication I become more receptive and adequate in my dealings with the world.[17]
We might perhaps add a third element to this change of perspective: a shift from things to processes, or more profoundly, from actual things and processes to the virtuality of things and processes, and how they are actualized. The conceptual tool of potential-actual, ideal-real would be replaced by the notions of virtual-actual and the process of individuation (see Deleuze 1994). This could give rise to an “intensive science” (DeLanda 2002).[18] This would enable us to understand the reality on different levels of interpenetration (rather than on the bivalent axis of unextended-extended): from a maximum of interpenetration in the Heavenly Veins, through the veins of each nature or individual mind, up to the veins or articulations of things he/she/it[19] encounters in their surroundings.
In sum the investigation of things and the research of their veins or articulations might be part of a new understanding of things, that is embodied and that involves a first-person experience as an integral part of it.
To speak about the possible relevance of “dedication”, then it could furnish a real methodology or preparation for any research. The academic world is fond of “methodologies” that seem to give credence to their products. If you can bring out the methodology you have used in your research, then you are self-reflecting and this guarantees that the results are not random and subjectively biased. Of course, often the methodology is discovered after the research has been finished, and is only projected as the guiding principle of the research after the fact. It is external to the real research itself, and it is a mere choosing between ideal models to apply on the reality. And what is most important: it doesn’t guarantee that the research matters, that it has any interest. A large bulk of the science is not creative, but brings together data of no importance and achieves banal results. My aim here is not so much to criticize this kind of inane research, but rather to show that due to this instrumentalization of knowledge, to the separation of res extensa and res cogitans, and the dominance of the least interpenetrating side of reality, of the actuality as its final product, in its juxtaposing parts and phases, we have cut off the link to how things matter to us, in body and mind.
So, Zhu Xi’s “dedication” might give a real methodology or propedeutics to science (and in fact, to all human endeavours). This implies that the mind becomes tranquil, melts down prejudices, assumptions, partial understandings, and that it lets all things to interpenetrate, so that the mind becomes more and more unbiased (gong ) and receptive, noticing articulations or veins that are both more basic and “minute”, and also prepares for more radical changes of ideas and for new insights.


Bibliography

Chan, Wing-tsit 1963. “The Great Synthesis in Chu Hsi”. – Chan, Wing-tsit. A Source Book of Chinese Philosophy. Princeton: Princeton University Press, pp. 588-653.
Chan, Wing-tsit 1989. Chu Hsi. New Studies. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press.
Ching, Julia 1976. To Acquire Wisdom. The Way of Wang Yang-ming. New York: Columbia University Press.
DeLanda, Manuel 2002. Intensive Science and Virtual Philosophy. London: Continuum.
Deleuze, Gilles 1994. Difference and Repetition. New York: Columbia University Press.
Fung, Yu-Lan 1942. “The Philosophy of Chu Hsi”. – Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, vol 7, no 1, pp 1-51. Translated by Derek Bodde.
Gardner, Daniel K. 1986. Chu Hsi and the Ta-hsueh. Harvard University Press.
Makeham, John (ed.) 2010. Dao Companion to Neo-Confucian Philosophy. London: Springer.
Puett, Michael 2002. To become a god. Cosmology, Sacrifice and Self-Divination in Early China. Cambridge (Mass)-London: Harvard University Press.
Rosemont, Henry Jr; Ames, Roger 2009. The Chinese Classic of Family Reverence. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press.
Smith, Kidder (ed.) 1990. Sung Dynasty Uses of the I Ching. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Zhang, Dainian 2002. Key Concepts in Chinese Philosophy. Beijing: Foreign Language Press. Translated by Edmund Ryden.
Zhu, Xi 2014a. Classified Conversations 朱子語類. http://ctext.org/zhuzi-yulei/zh [18.03.2014].
Zhu, Xi 2014 c. Commentary to the “Great Learning” 大學章句集注.


[1] In the Dao companion to the Neo-Confucian philosophy (2010) which contains excellent surveys of several thinkers of that tradition, the editor John Makeham discusses at length this terminological question and justifies his choice for retaining the term neo-confucianism. See Makeham 2010: x-xiv.
[2] The term xinrujia, literally “new ru-ism” appeared only in the 20th century.
[3] Other translations have been proposed, e.g. “law” in Henke’s translation of Wang Yangming, Bodde’s translation of Feng Youlan; “normative pattern” (Puett 2002) etc.
[4] The criticism of abstract knowledge has been extensively furthered by modern era philosophers like Spinoza, English empiricists, and also Wang Yangming (for whom doing is knowing, and if you claim to know, without a corresponding behavior, then it isn’t really a knowledge, or, in other words, it is an empty, abstract knowledge – since every real and concrete knowledge is incorporated).
[5] Cf. how for Leibniz every monad expresses the whole world, but clearly only a certain part of it, i.e. the whole world is enveloped in every monad. The traditional daoxue reference is to Mengzi who says that he contains he everything in himself (萬物皆備於我), but perhaps a more proximal influence comes from buddhism and the tathagatagarbha or foxing 佛性 theory: that everyone has in him/herself the buddha-nature.
[6] For a small list, see for example Smith 1990: 172.
[7] All the citations of Zhu Xi in Chinese not otherwise marked are taken from Zhu Xi’s Classified Conversations, see Zhu 2014 ab.
[8] See Chan 1989: 255. As far as I know, the contemporary medicine aknowledges the continuity of body and mind, that one can see from the placebo effect and also from the importance of emotional condition for the process of recovery. But still a lot more systematic research has to be done into this “subjective” side of healing. One handicap in this might be the lack of conceptual tools; and daoxue philosophy might be one source for them.
[9] Perhaps a similar thing could be said of Buddhism also. Recall that the Buddha didn’t become enlightened at the deepest level of meditation, but some levels closer to the “surface”. Even if one might achieve a total absence of thoughts, we might wonder what sense it might have. Perhaps what is important, is not the presence or absence of thoughts, but their different levels of interpenetration, so that one is capable of moving between these levels.
[10] Again we can see that this basic tenet is the same for Buddhism. As is often the case in the Chinese philosophy (even contrary to appearances, e.g. the apparent antibuddhism of the daoxue movement), the differences are not so much of exclusive, two-valent choices, but rather of where the stress is laid, in small details of context – that might, of course, bring important consequences. One of the main differences here is of course the fact that while Buddhism was mainly practiced in monastic setting, the daoxue movement remained engaged in maritial and public life, persuading even some with more seclusive tendencies, like Shao Yong, to marry.
[11] The traditional translation is “righteousness”, but I prefer the term proposed by Rosemont and Ames (2009).
[12] Actually, this part of the text is presented by Zhu Xi as a “reconstruction” of a purportedly “missing” part from the Great Learning.
[13] Feng Youlan comments it in these words (where “law” = “veins”): “Every individual thing in the universe has its own Law; all these separate Laws, furthermore, are to be found summed up in the Nature which is contained in our own Mind. To acquire exhaustive knowledge of the Laws of these external objects, therefore, means to gain understanding of the Nature that lies within ourselves. Hence the continued acquisition of such knowledge will eventually lead to a moment of sudden enlightenment, when the Laws of all the myriad things in the universe will be seen to exist within our own Nature. This is the meaning of the words: “In the Universe there is no single thing that lies beyond the Nature.”” (Fung 1942: 40)
[14] Zhu Xi uses a similar metaphor for “dedication” and “appropriateness”.
[15] E.g. how Wang Yangming in his youth set up with his friend to study the bamboo in his yard, both becoming sick after a couple of days. Wang Yangming doesn’t describe exactly how did it look like, but surely he did no scientific experiments! See Ching 1976.
[16] See Aristotle’s Metaphysics.
[17] The idea that my mind is presupposed by everything that appears, is developed by Wang Yangming. In his case the distinction must be made between the empirical self and a transcendental self – it is the latter that is presupposed by every appearing – also by the empirical self, that can be described as the limitation of obsuration of it.
[18] Perhaps the emergent research project of biosemiotics is moving toward this goal.
[19] In Chinese Buddhism as well as in Daoxue, also inanimate things (like tiles and stones, or mountains and rivers) were often considered to have their own veins and even a kind of consciousness or knowledge.