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 理 and
qi 氣. 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 性) and feelings (qing 情) These are the two aspects of the human mind:
nature is its “substance” (ti 體)
and feelings are its “function” (yong 用).
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 心) 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敬).
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 (敬,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 daoxue “quiet 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 義)[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 公) 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 2014b. Classified
Conversations 朱子語類. http://club.ntu.edu.tw/~davidhsu/New-Davidhome/05-david-book/DAVIDBOOK/CHINESE/002david-new-book2/ZHUZIYULEI.pdf
[18.03.2014].
Zhu, Xi 2014 c. Commentary
to the “Great Learning” 大學章句集注.
http://www.millionbook.net/gd/z/zhuxi/000/002.htm
[18.03.2014].
[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.
[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.
Nessun commento:
Posta un commento