ChinaX Transcript Week 5: Confucius and Confucianism

Transcription

1 ChinaX Transcript Week 5: Confucius and Confucianism Historical Overview In the year 771 BCE, invading tribal groups from the west captured the Zhou capital and killed the Zhou king. His heir apparent fled to the east and reestablished the Zhou in an area by modern Luoyang on the fertile plain of the Yellow River Valley. This is the beginning of what is commonly called the Eastern Zhou Period. The Eastern Zhou lasted for 500 years and was a time of near constant warfare. It is commonly divided into two sub-periods. The first three centuries are called the Spring and Autumn Period, a name which takes after a famous chronicle documenting events from the time, the Spring and Autumns Annuls. The second major subdivision, usually dated from the end of the fifth century BCE to 221 BCE is called the Warring States Period, referring to the ever-escalating wars that characterized the times. In truth, one way to conceptualize the Eastern Zhou generally is to imagine it as an ongoing battle royale. The Zhou court never regained its former influence. And around 200 vassal states, both large and small, were left to fight for territory and dominance. At the beginning of the Warring States period, only seven major players remain standing. One of those states, named Qin, will be the ultimate winner, conquering all under heaven in 221 BCE. The upheavals of the Eastern Zhou took place over the course of the waning of the Bronze Age. Iron technology was reshaping the face of the earth, as the sharper and more durable tools and weapons led to large expansions of cultivated land and new types of warfare. Not surprisingly, the Zhou system of legitimization, built upon the control of bronze ritual objects, grew hollow in the transformed landscape of the Iron Age. By the Warring States period, the Zhou court controlled only a tiny territory, and the Zhou king's status as son of heaven was all but nominal. By the mid-fourth century BCE, momentous reforms were spreading like wildfire, beginning with Shang Yang's reform and Qin. By abolishing the aristocrat system of Zhou in favor of tightly controlled and centralized bureaucracy, Shang Yang turned Qin into the most productive and organized state of its time. And other states had no choice but to follow suit. Accompanying these dramatic political and military developments was also an unprecedented flourishing of intellectual inquiry. When the traditional order of things could no longer be taken for granted, thinkers debated over what ought to be the Dao, that is the correct way or path for going forward. They argued over how a ruler ought to rule and how an individual ought to be educated. Later historiography speaks of 100 different schools vying for influence, of thinkers and throngs of disciples wandering from state to state in search of the ruler who would adopt their vision. The writings attributed to these figures became the basic component of elite education over the next two millennia. And perhaps the greatest figure of them all was a man called Kongzi or Zhongni. You might know him as Confucius.

2 Section 1: The Many Faces of Confucianism 1. Introduction I'm here, in front of the Department of East Asian Languages and Civilizations, and you'll notice right here is a piece of calligraphy by Rao Zongyi. Rao Zongyi is probably the greatest living calligrapher of China. And he writes here, [siwen zaizi], which simply says something like this, "This culture of ours resides here." But what he's referring to is a passage from the Analects of Confucius. And Confucius was one day trapped between two states, and he was under threat, his disciples all very worried. And Confucius says, [Wenwang jimo, wen buzai zi hu]. The founder of the Zhou dynasty is long gone, but is not his culture here with me? And he's looking to Heaven and saying, Heaven protects me. Heaven protects me to make it possible for people born after me to participate in this culture. So Rao Zongyi, in doing this calligraphy, is saying, even today, to participate in this culture in a foreign country, in a foreign place, this is something that matters. We're going to go downstairs now to the Harvard Yenching Library and talk a bit more about Confucius. But on the way, I want to show you another piece of calligraphy, this one from the 17th century. This was done by the famous calligrapher, Dong Qichang, from the late Ming dynasty. Great artist, great calligrapher, a theorist of the arts as well. But what he's writing with his calligraphy is not something that he himself wrote. He's actually copying something that somebody in the 11th century wrote. A man named Zhou Dunyi. And Zhou Dunyi begins by saying, [Sheng ke xue hu? Yue: ke]. Can you learn how to be a sage? And the answer is, yes. Well, when they're talking about a sage, they're talking about Confucius. Confucius, not as somebody with innate gifts, but somebody who is a model that we can learn from. And we can learn to be sages just like Confucius. And so there, from Rao Zongyi in the 21st century, back to Confucius in the sixth century BC, to the 11th century, to the 16th century, Confucius has remained a figure in Chinese history. And trying to understand why, and what he was saying, and what he meant, is our job for today. 2. Many Faces of Confucius Confucius the sage, the man who was born with an innate knowledge; Confucius the philosopher who understood human nature; Confucius the paragon of education; at one point, in the People's Republic, he was criticized as being a reactionary. But there's also the Confucius of The Analects, this little book of sayings in 20 chapters in which Confucius interacts with and is described by his students. And I have a bunch of editions of The Analects here. There's a wonderful translation by DC Lau, Confucius-- The Analects. Here's a modern People's Republic of China edition in simplified characters. The texts we have in this course are coming out of the sources of Chinese tradition, which Columbia University Press has very kindly allowed us to use. This is a very nice edition from the 16th century. The person who owned it punctuated it with all this red ink. And then above, in very fine calligraphy, he wrote comments on what he was reading.

3 Here's another example of doing that, printed with two kinds of ink, with marks to show where the emphasis is-- in this case, he's emphasizing almost everything-- with some commentaries between the lines, above the margins, and so on. This is from Japan. And it's actually a reprint of a 13th century edition. A Korean book, going further, from the 16th century, which is, in fact, glosses on various terms in The Analects and other Confucian classics. It this case, it's the eight rows of dancers. If this can be tolerated, what cannot be tolerated? I'll explain that rather obscure reference in a bit-- but again, Chinese characters, and then Korean Hangul with explanation. Finally, an edition of The Analects which is in Chinese, Mongolian, and Manchu. So The Analects is a text that's been made in many countries from very early on, has been explained in many ways. And that's the text we're going to use to try to understand Confucius better. 3. The Time of Confucius I want to talk a bit about how we're going to approach Confucius. I want to talk about Confucius in context. Now, that's a choice. I'm thinking of Confucius as somebody who lived in a certain place and time, who's responding to events as he perceives events, rather than Confucius purely as a philosopher. Confucius is living in a time when states are competing for wealth and power. There's a switch now from the charioteering of the nobility as a form of warfare, to infantry with iron weapons. States need revenues to pay for large armies. They're competing for power with each other. And they're beginning to employ specialists-- low-level nobility would no longer have a job-- and become literate and can work as retainers for the powerful. The Chinese word for this is shi, and it's a word we'll be coming back to a number of times. Confucius is one of these professional administrator class people, but he begins as a somewhat marginal figure. He's orphaned when young. He doesn't have powerful relatives to get him into high position. He could have become a military officer. He could have made a career as an administrator, a ritual specialist, they're all sorts of things he could have done. And he chooses to do none of them. He chooses instead to devote his life for learning. As he says in The Analects, when I was 15, I made my commitment to learning. And the kind of learning he devotes himself to is the useless kind of learning. It has no skills to offer. He's not going to make people rich or powerful. At one point he says, the learning of antiquity was for oneself. The problem today is that the learning of today is to please others. The kind of learning he's interested in is the learning for oneself. Confucius is also loyal to the Zhou dynasty. He's living in sixth century BC. The Zhou King is very weak. He's loyal to the Zhou King. He sees the founding of the Zhou dynasty as a source of models. He worries that he hasn't dreamt of the Duke of Zhou, the early regent to the Zhou dynasty. He dreams of the Duke of Zhou. He dreams of the Zhou dynasty.

4 Section 2: Confucius of The Analects 1. The Confucius of The Analects Confucius wants to serve. He wants to be used. And his disciples say, "Master, if you had a beautiful jewel locked at home in a box, would you just leave it in the box forever? Or would you take it to the market and sell it?" And Confucius said, "Oh, of course, I'd take it to the market and sell it"-- and then he pauses and says, "but only for the right price." So it's not that Confucius wasn't willing to sell himself, but he wanted to decide what he was worth. Confucius is there saying to his students, do what's right, not what's profitable, not what's advantageous. Be a superior scholar, not a petty scholar. And in some sense, he's always dividing the loyalties of his followers, loyalties to him and his teachings versus loyalty to family and state. And there's something here, I think, an undercurrent that is very important for Chinese history, the notion that to be devoted to learning is, in fact, to put oneself in tension with the demands of one's family, with the demands of the state, which are constantly calling on you to compromise, to serve their interests rather than your own. And remember that, for Confucius, it's learning for oneself, not to please others, that's most important. 2. We ve Lost the Way Confucius defines the problem of his day. And he defines it in a very simple way. He says, we have lost the way. We've lost the way. If there's a path, somebody must have walked it before you. You know that it has to go somewhere. It has a destination. And you know if you're on it or not. And Confucius's way of saying we've lost the way is to say, we are not on the right path. And so his job is to say what that path is, how to be on the right path. There's a larger problem here, perhaps, a contrast with the Western tradition or the Mediterranean tradition or Plato, who keeps saying that the ideas, the forms, that we represent in the world can never really be equal to the real and true form. In the Western tradition, there is necessarily going to be a gap between "is" and "ought." And we will not recover. After Adam and Eve bit the apple, people fell in the Judeo Christian tradition and can never fully recover. But for Confucius, he granted that there was a gap between how we ought to be and how we are. We're not on the path, and we should be on the path. But he was convinced that we could get back to the right place, that there did not need to be any gap between "is" and "ought," that at a certain moment, we could act spontaneously and do what was right, that we could be entirely on the right path. He says, at one point, "I was 15 when I set my will on learning." And then he says, "At 70, I could follow my desires without overstepping the bounds." I could live this spontaneous, real life, and yet a proper and moral life.

5 3. How to Find the Way Back If Confucius says, I know the problem but I can solve it. We're not on the way, but I know what the way is. How does he know what the way is? And I'm actually not going to answer that question, because I don't think Confucius really can ask the question, how I know what the way is. But what he can answer is where I know the way from. He's saying, there's a source from which we can know how we have to be today. And what's the source? This source is antiquity. His antiquity. Confucius is one of the first people to say, the answers lie in antiquity. Even though, for Confucius, antiquity was 500 years before the founding of the Zhou dynasty, they knew something then. They were doing something then that guaranteed that they would be on the right path. Confucius says, [Haogu, minyiqiuzhi]. I like antiquity, and I am good at seeking it. At another point, he says, [Shu er buzuo]. I transmit, I do not innovate. Confucius is convinced that he is taking something that was real, that was in the past, and bringing it into the present, and pointing us our direction to it. And what is it? And here, I'm going to give you the answer that Confucius has, and you're not going to find it very exciting. Well, his answer is, that is ritual. Not very exciting. The Chinese word, li. And he means rituals very much in the sense of rituals. For example, a ceremony, a marriage ceremony, where people have roles they practice. They learn the roles. And by carrying out the ritual, they actually change the situation. They now become married to each other. Or think of a larger ceremony, a church service, or a commencement at a university. Think of ceremonies as occasions where people have many different roles to play. And each person learns their proper role and carries it out in harmony with others, and thus, together, they make something happen. They complete something. That's ritual. Now, extend that concept of ritual to daily life. Think of it in terms of your relationship with your parents, with your siblings, with your colleagues, with your friends. Think of that as an occasion where we have roles to play, and the other party has roles to play. And that ritual enactment, they're all through our lives. Those rituals of daily practice are, in fact, what keeps us together as people, and keeps us, so to speak, out of harm's way in our relationships with others. So Confucius, at one point, takes up this issue of ritual, and he applies to government. Well, if somebody ask him, what's the key to good government? He says, ah, no problem at all. He says, let the ruler act as a ruler should act, the father act as a father should act, the son act as a son should act, and so on. That's all it takes to have a good society. Let people play their roles, even though he could recognize that, perhaps, they weren't playing those roles in the present. 4. Confucian Magic Prof. Bol: By the way, we're getting some noise from the back room. Chris, could you just close that back door? Chris: OK. Yeah.

6 Prof. Bol: OK. Thanks. There's something more, and this is what we didn't want people to see, necessarily. We're going to do something. We're going to show you the magic in Confucianism. It turns out that there is something that we might call Confucian magic in which you can make things happen. In this case, I'm going to ask for two volunteers from our crew here, Jennifer Yum and Xuan Li. And Jennifer, if you'll come and stand in front of the table over here, right around here, right. And Xuan, if you'll come over here. And I'm going to give Xuan an instruction, and you're going to carry out the instruction. (WHISPERING) Xuan: Hello, Jennifer. Jennifer: Hello. Prof. Bol: Thank you. That was it. You're done. You can go sit down now. So what was the magic? What was the magic? Of course, when you do this in a large auditorium and class, the students are just as flummoxed as they are. What did he do, and why does it matter? Well, you notice that when Xuan made Jennifer talk and raise her hand, she didn't put a knife to her throat? She just went over and stuck her hand out, and said something to her, and Jennifer responded. Did you see that? That was magic. And that's what we mean by ritual. Ritual has the power to make people behave in certain ways, to make them behave in civilized ways. But it's only because Xuan had virtue in herself that she knew how to behave, that she could exercise that power over Jennifer. But there was another piece of magic that happened, too. And I bet you didn't see it. Does anyone know here the other piece of magic that took place. Student: The door is closed. Prof. Bol: I closed the door. Did you see me close the door? You say no, but I closed the door. I closed the door by command. I told Chris to close the door, and he closed the door. So in fact, there are two kinds of magic in ritual. One is this very lateral relationship, where one person gets another person to respond. But the other is a hierarchical relationship, where somebody of superior authority can order somebody else to do something. Both of those are parts of magic. Both of those are parts of ritual. Both of those are parts of a Confucian society. 5. Ritual with Attitude I told you that in this Korean text that glosses on the classics, there is a phrase about eight dancers. This actually comes from a passage in The Analects where Confucius is talking about one of the noble families of his own state, the Ji family. And he says, the Ji family uses eight rows of dancers in the courtyard. If this can be tolerated, what can not be tolerated? Well, you would know, I guess, if you lived at those times, that eight rows of dancers in the courtyard was a prerogative reserved for the lord, not for any old noble family. And he was using ritual, the ritual of a performance, to usurp the authority of somebody higher than him, or the Ji family was doing this. It was their way of encroaching on the authority of their superiors, which means that ritual can be used hypocritically.

7 You can use ritual to seek advantage. You can use ritual, in fact, to go against the very purposes of ritual itself. And Confucius was aware of this problem, that ritual had become meaningless for many. And if you can't figure out how to make it meaningful again, if you can't figure out how to get a ruler to act as a ruler should act, a subject to act as a subject should act, if you can't do that, then there's no hope for getting back on the right way. And this is the moment at which, I think, we see Confucius the philosopher, Confucius the first great thinker, moral thinker in Chinese history emerges. Because he accepts that fact, and rather than going in the direction that some of his contemporaries did, which is to say, well, why don't we take rituals and define them as laws, and demand that everybody follow these laws, or they will be punished? And that way, we could have a good society. Confucius say, no, that's not the solution. And what he comes up with is the notion that we have to bring an attitude towards ritual. He begins to focus on an attitude, and he has name for it. He calls it Ren. And he says to his disciples, you know, if you want to be Ren, you can be Ren just like that. You can't do ritual without Ren. You can't make music work without Ren. You have to have this attitude of Ren. And his disciples get very confused. They keep trying to pin him down, to try to get him to define Ren as a particular idea, or a set of words you could say, or a particular set of actions, ways to behave. And Confucius keeps pulling back. He said, no, no. Ren is something different. Ren is something different. And what is it? There's a passage in The Analects, and you can see it here. It's called the method of Ren. The method of what we might call benevolence, humaneness. Actually, any English translation isn't going to be fully adequate, but humaneness, benevolence, these work well enough. Confucius asked, how about somebody who could come in and save the world, and make sure that all the starving were fed, and bring peace the world? How about that? He said, wow. As Confucius says, that would be even hard for Yao and Shun, the great sage kings of antiquity. Would be hard for them, but that's not Ren. That's not Ren. So what's Ren? He said, well, the method of Ren is to want others to advance to the degree that you advance yourself. In other words, it's not about self-sacrifice. It's about the ability to look at the other, and see in the other your own interest as well, and want to advance their interests as you advance your own. To see yourself as part of a community, where your helping yourself move forward, involves helping others move forward as well. So what Confucius seems to be saying is that to be a person of Ren is to bring to bear on your performance of your duties, of your activities, or of your rituals, an attitude of concern for the others. A very simple thing. But if you think about it, that was, in some sense, the essence of ritual in the first place. That we are acting in harmony together in response to each other. And Confucius said, that's the attitude that, consciously, you must have in you and bring to your performance of life itself. 6. Junzi And he starts to redefine, but he redefines the very notion of what it means to be noble person, a member of the nobility. What, in Chinese, is called these characters, junzi, which literally means the son of a prince. And he says, to be a junzi, to be the son of a noble, means you ought to be a noble man, not a nobleman. Not a noble, but a noble person, a morally noble person.

8 So he's trying to move the notion of political right, of the right that you have because you're of good birth, because you're of high station, and trying to say let's think of this as, that is more important just to be a moral person. This is not a matter of birth. It's a matter of learning. And so we have, with The Analects of Confucius, the notion of learning, which is not learning as study, the Chinese word, xue, often translated as study. It's not that. Remember Confucius is saying that learning for oneself is the true kind of learning. So learning here is a much larger meaning. It's about selftransformation. It's about accumulating experience. It's about learning how to bring certain attitudes to bear on conduct. It's about serving, as well. And I think there's a kind of a generalization we could make from Confucius about, sort of, the Confucians through history. Which is to say that the Confucians in history want to be part of the system, but they want to be part of the system as moral actors. If things don't work out, if the times go too far off the path, they're willing to withdraw. They step aside. But they want to be in public service. They want to find somebody who will buy their talents, but they don't want to sell out. That's a hard position to maintain. It strikes me that Chinese history doesn't show us any rulers who were Confucians. The ruler could be patrons of Confucians, but the only people really can be Confucians were the officials that serve the government. Now, I'm going to go on now, and talk a little bit about Confucius' successors.

9 Section 3: Reading The Analects 1. Interview with Professor Puett Prof. Bol: Let me jump right in and lay out something that, in this module, I've talked to students about, which is there's this passage in The Analects where Confucius says, I thread everything on a single strand. Prof. Puett: Yes. Prof. Bol: And so in some sense, what I've been doing is saying, OK, look at all these disparate passages in The Analects. And I say, OK, what single strand, coherent theory, can we divide from them? Prof. Puett: Absolutely. One of the things that's intriguing about The Analects is indeed, here you have the great master, giving statement after statement to his disciples, and yet, they seem straightforwardly contradictory. He'll say one thing to one disciple, another thing to another disciple. And indeed, I think part of the intriguing aspect of reading the text is one is constantly thinking, well, how in the world would one cohere these different arguments, and what is the underlying vision here? Prof. Bol: Do you have an example that comes to mind? Prof. Puett: Yes. So I'll begin with a famous one, famous in the sense that it's literally divided Confucian thinkers for two millennia. He'll talk about rituals. And there are some passages where he will explicitly say, you overcome the self with rituals, and only then do you gain this quality that he cares so much about, variously translated humaneness, benevolence, goodness. Prof. Bol: Ren. Prof.. Puett: Ren is the key term here. Other passages where he'll say, well, what use are rituals if you actually don't have ren? And if you add these up, they're contradictory. You can come down either way. And I think part of the power of the book is it's his statements aren't easy or obvious. For example, it's not the case that the book will say, a disciple walks in, Confucius says the following, and look at the great results that come from it. You never get that in The Analects. Actually, he's saying often counter-intuitive things, complex things, and it puts the reader-- and I think this is part of the power of the book-- in the position of trying to figure out what's going on? Why is he saying this? Prof. Bol: One of the things we're planning to do in our online forums is to take passages which provide these sort of dichotomies, if you will-- one side is like this, the other side is like that. This is kind of an exploration of what-- we're doing what Confucius wanted us to do. Prof. Puett: Precisely. Prof.. Bol: We're having to think about it. Prof. Puett: Precisely. 2. Professor Puett s Answers

10 Prof. Puett: I think there is one, but I think it's not what I would call a discursive one. In other words, it's not one where we could say, Confucius's overall view is x, and that explains y they'll say this about ritual and that about another topic, and that's what pulls it together. I think actually what pulls it together is it's a text trying to present a figure-- namely, Confucius, of course-- doing in practice what it is he's arguing. Prof. Bol: What sorts of things is he doing that they want to record? Prof. Puett: People will always pick out these sort of obviously exciting philosophical statements from the Analects. And that's, of course, very important. But a great thing to do is look at book 10. What book 10 gives you is Confucius doing rituals. And literally, by rituals, it will tell you how he walks into a room and straightens a mat before he sits on it, how high he will hold his elbows when he's talking to certain people of different ranks. And what I think that chapter is trying to do is to present Confucius as he lived his life. And then you add those to the various passages where he's talking to disciples and get a sense of why this mattered, why it was important to him to live his life this way, and what he thought he was gaining from it, and what he thought he was training his students to do. And only by looking at the whole text do you really get a sense of what that thread is. Prof. Bol: Can we then go the next step and say, OK, if we can think about it, well, we'll get a philosophy? Or is it really that Confucius himself might not be entirely sure he has a philosophy as much as he knows how he wants students to engage and to think? Prof. Puett: Yes. And I think it is the latter. But maybe we should expand our vision of philosophy to include this. In other words, maybe what he's doing is, in fact, giving what we ought to call philosophy. But then philosophy would mean not simply some kind of rational set of rules, a systematic thinking. In this case, philosophy would mean a way of life in which human beings, by following a certain path, can become incomparably greater human beings than they otherwise could have become, more humane, but also more responsive to situations, better able to respond to situations, better able to encourage and inspire those around them to be better human beings. And precisely because one couldn't lay out-- or he does not, in the Analects, present as laying out-- a systematic statement as to how to get that, it puts us in the position, as you said, of sort of working through it and doing what he wants us to do. And I think he's trying to get us on that path of doing it. And I would like to call that philosophy. It's simply a very expanded notion of what philosophy would mean. Prof. Bol: It strikes me also that what we're getting at is, at least from the perspective of Mediterranean civilization, that what we're talking about is the humanities as a mode of learning, right? Prof. Puett: Yes. I think that's exactly it. Prof. Bol: That it always has to be reflecting back on the self. Prof. Puett: Yes. Yes. Prof. Bol: So I think that, in fact, is what we want to do. We want to ask you to follow along the path that Profssor Puett has laid out for us and say, let's read The Analects with the idea of improving ourselves.

11 Section 4: Confucius Successors 1. Confucius Successors: Mencius And Confucius had followers, lots of students. We know something about some of them. He himself classified students in various ways. For example, he would say that so and so, these were people renowned for their ethical conduct. We know that after Confucius passed away, his disciples went in various directions. But really the two most interesting and best known people who saw themselves as followers of Confucius-- although not directly, but generations later -- were Mencius and Xunzi. Let me talk a little bit about Mencius. So Mencius lives in a world where Confucianism has, in fact, fallen under attack. And he asked to give an answer to the question, why should we be good? That's not a question that Confucius had to answer. Confucius was saying, well, this is what it takes to be good. But for Mencius, Mencius really has to give an explanation to people, why should you be good? And his answer is very simple. And he tries a kind of a mind experiment. And the mind experiment is about a child in the well. But since we don't think of wells every day, let's think of something else. Suppose you see a mother and a toddler at a busy intersection. Cars are speeding by. And the toddler breaks loose and starts to run into the street. And you can see the baby is about to be hit by the car. Do you feel anything? Do you have to-- you don't have to act. Just ask yourself, do I think I would feel anything if I saw that? If you do, Mencius says, it's because it's instinctive to you, just as every tongue, every pallat, prefers the sweet to the bitter. So we prefer to care about people to not caring. An answer is, you should be good because that's your instinct, that's your nature. Human nature is good. And to ask you to be good, is to ask you simply to want to be what you already are, and to try to realize that. It doesn't mean that you're good without trying to be. You have to cultivate these qualities in you. But what are the qualities? Now, this is the problem. Think about the story of the subway rider standing there in the station. And somebody pushes him in front of the train. He dies. And next to that was a photographer. And the photographer simply stood there taking pictures as this happened. There was some concern. There was some concern in the public about that photographer. And from the a very Mencian point of view, it seemed he didn't care. And there was something morally reprehensible about that. And so one could say, so how does Mencius solve a problem like that? 2. Mencius Response [MUSIC PLAYING] One answer is that Mencius, in fact-- and you can see here-- Mencius sees a continuum. There are sages. There are worthies. There are humans like you and me. But then there are barbarians too, people who are not civilized, and then there are animals.

12 And from Mencius' point of view, if you don't feel anything when you see the child running in front of the speeding car, or the child is falling into the well, when the man is pushed before a subway train, if you feel nothing, then Mencius' answer is then, well, maybe you aren't human. Maybe you're something else. And so although we can read Mencius' story of the child in the well as a mind experiment to convince us that human nature is good, it's also true the Mencius has a universal definition of what it means to be a human being. That if we deny morality in us, then we're not human. So that's a definition, in fact, rather than an instinctive feeling. And Xunzi says, OK, it doesn't work. 3. Confucius Successors: Xunzi Xunzi comes into play after Mencius is gone. And it was fair to say that wars had gotten worse, problems had increased. And he writes a piece, which we'll now read, called "Human Nature is Evil." Mencius had written "Human Nature is Good." Xunzi writes "Human Nature is Evil." And he points out, as you'll see, all the ways in which human nature is evil. If Mencius is somebody who feels-- Mencius says, "I feel that"-- Xunzi is somebody that says, "I think that." If Mencius is about empathy, Xunzi is about intellection, is about thinking. He's interested in education. He's interested in history. He's interested in logical systems. He's interested in argument and debate. He's not somebody who appeals on the basis of thought experiments. He appeals by theory and by explanation, a very different character from Mencius. And so that gives us a problem, and the problem that we're going to ask you, in fact, to address. How is it possible for both Mencius and Xunzi-- and we've given you passages from Mencius to read and passages from Xunzi-- how is it possible that both Mencius and Xunzi could conceive of themselves as true followers of Confucius?

13 Section 5: The Confucian Path The Xunzi might have been read out of the Confucian Canon, denied as a true follower of Confucius. And people might have decided for a number of centuries that the only true follower of Confucius was Mencius. But I think we can make a different kind of argument, that both Mencius and Xunzi see that we must cultivate the virtues. Mencius says we should cultivate the virtues, because the virtues are natural to us. And Xunzi says if they aren't natural to us, we still have to cultivate them. But both of them agree that they have to be cultivated. And there is there this wonderfully positive spirit that people can transform themselves, that, through learning, we can make ourselves into moral people, and that government, if it's leaders, if those who participate in government, can learn to act morally, can learn to cultivate their virtues as human beings, that the world would be a better place. Now, I've gotten ahead of myself, because I've talked about Confucius, Mencius, Xunzi. And we've gone through the sixth century BC to the third century BC. But In those intervening years, many other schools of thought appeared, many masters of persuasion, with different ideas. And in fact, Confucianism was under harsh attack, and in the time of Xunzi, it was by no means the dominant school of thoughs in China. If you want to find out more about that, you'll have to go onto the next module. Thank you.

14 Section 6: Professor Puett on Zhuangzi (Optional) The figure we will be talking about today is named Zhuangzi. Z-H-U-A-N-G-Z-I. And in the alternate-- and again, older Romanization-- this is the same figure that used to be spelled C-H- U-A-N-G-T-Z-U. You of course don't need to know that. I simply mention it because that other name has made it into English lexicon and based upon the older spelling, it's often been mispronounced as "Chuang Tzu." So if you have heard the name "Chuang Tzu," that's actually a mispronunciation of indeed the figure we're talking about today, Zhuangzi. Same person, just the spelling we now use looks a lot more like it was actually pronounced. So this is the same person. He is the third of the so-called Daoist that we're reading in this class. We first read the Laozi, then the Inward Training. We are now turning to the Zhuangzi. As we mentioned, and here I want to underline because it becomes all the more important today, Daoism is a later retrospective school. None of these thinkers were thinking of themselves as being part of a school called Daoism. And that's particularly the case with our figure today. This is a figure that would resist any possible means of classification, would resist anything saying, my thinking represents this category in opposition to other categories of thinking. He would, in part or strongly, say he's really not part of any kind of a school. So again, when we call him a Daoist, we're putting him and giving him a label that he probably wouldn't have agreed with. Not necessarily the name, but simply a label, period. Let me say a few words about him. Which will be quick, because we actually don't know a lot about him. We have a ton of stories about him, and you're reading them. He tells lots of stories in his own book about himself. For reasons we'll get to momentarily, I wouldn't take them as being historical artifacts of things that really actually happened in the world. So this is a text probably put together fourth century BCE, roughly contemporary with and perhaps a bit later than the other ones we've been mentioning so far, just because he'll incorporate some of the figures we've mentioned in his stories. But we don't know a lot about him. That's good, because I think he would be very happy about that fact. What he wants is to have a text that is going to change us. And that's what he's left us. And it will change you, and I think in some very intriguing ways. Let me begin by saying a few words about it. I realize since the papers were literally due at 10:00 AM, you might not have yet read the Zhuangzi in depth as of now. So let me say a few words about what you will be facing. You will be facing one of the most exciting, imaginative texts you have ever read. But it's a difficult text in an intriguing way. Note if you go back to the texts we've read, we began of course with The Analects. And part of the power of that text was an attempt to give you this figure, Confucius, working with his disciples, explaining what he did on a daily basis, what these rituals were he was following, how he would talk to disciples. And it was a portrait of someone trying to live his philosophy.

15 And as we discussed, part of the power of the book was just giving you those vignettes. Him saying something to a disciple, him acting in a certain way, portraying what it would mean to live a life as Confucius was calling on us to live. We noted this was true in a different way, a somewhat more elaborate way with Mencius, where there too we have a text that will give you portraits of Mencius as a human being. Spending a life trying to be a good human being, trying to develop a philosophy and a way of thinking and a way of life that will affect others for the better. Striving in a complex way-- it's a complex portrait-- to be a good person given the moral psychology he is developing. And again, part of the power of the book was to get you into him as a person, given his philosophy. Versus something like the Mozi, which was of course, an attempt to lay out clear arguments. Here are my criteria for argumentation. Here are our standards. Follow these standards and you will be a proper rational human being. And the text was largely shorn of the kind of exciting writing, anecdotes, intriguing stories that we get in the other text. It was what we would think of as a more straightforward philosophical analysis. This is what is good. Here's how you define it. Here are the standards of argumentation. And now we've seen two so-called Daoist texts that go about this in yet a different way, a third way of writing a text. In this third one so far, we have no figures mentioned, unlike the Confucian texts. Certainly no rational standards of argumentation in texts like the Laozi or the Inward Training. Rather what you get are these-- and we actually don't, tellingly, have a good word for it in English-- powerful phrases for the Laozi. "The Way that can be spoken of is not the enduring Way." These very paradoxical phrases that ask you to work through them to understand the implications. In the Inward Training, these incredibly powerful lines trying to get you in the mode of thinking of the world in terms of these energies and your training that you can give through these energies. Again, no names mentioned, no anecdotes. Simply trying to pull you in with the language of what it's trying to say. Now we have yet another one. Perhaps the most intriguing of them all, or certainly the most challenging of them all. What you're going to find is a text that is going to give you incredible numbers of stories, but they're wild stories. You don't get a portrait of what Zhuangzi did on a daily basis. Or you get a portrait of Zhuangzi, but it's, you'll see, a rather wild one. Rather what you get are wild anecdotes, with these incredible fictional characters, including many animals-- birds, fish, all these sorts of creatures. How the world seems from their perspective. Very, very humorous stories too, extremely funny where he'll love to bring you down a path with a story and then give you this ludicrous and hysterical pun or this crucial twist, this surprise twist. He will talk about historical figures, but he'll have them spout rather odd things. Confucius will appear talking to his disciples saying some rather un-confucian things. In other words, it's this incredibly imaginative text. Wildly fictional, wildly imaginative. And as with all of our texts, it's written this way to enact what it wants us to do. So one of our questions will be what does it want us to do? Why is it written this way? Why is it such a challenging text? Because as we'll see, that will be a bit counter intuitive with what he's calling on us to do. And how should we understand the larger argument here?

16 To begin with, let us as always pull back and give some general views about what he's up to. And then we'll get into the nitty-gritty. First some general views. Since he's classified as a Daoist, you might imagine, and you will quickly see when you begin reading, he does talk about this thing called the Way. Very much as did Laozi. You also might notice he seems to be emphasizing rather different things about the Way. So why don't we just begin right there? What is the Way for Zhuangzi? First of all, a contrast. For Laozi, as we saw, the Way is, in a sense, everything. Everything in its absolutely undifferentiated state. So again, cosmologically, that state from which the differentiated cosmos emerges. And to which someday it may return. On a more mundane level, that ground from which things grow and to which they may return. Grass grows, grass dies. It grows from the Way, it returns to the Way. Experientially, if we see the world differentially, the Way would be the degree to which we could experience the world as everything interrelated to everything else. In its stillness, in its emptiness, in its calmness. And if we can still ourselves, calm ourselves, empty ourselves, we get closer to that Way, closer to that ground. And as we noted, the verbs therefore are returning. We're going back, returning, holding fast to the Way. It's that basis, that ground from which the differentiated world converges, and again, to which it will return. Note the different ways that the Way will be spoken about with Zhuangzi. In some ways similar, of course. It's everything, as we'll see, in its absolutely interrelated state. But the focus isn't so much on absolute undifferentiation. It's not so much the ground. It isn't even a verb of going back, holding fast to, returning to. Rather think of the Way for Zhuangzi as absolutely everything in its constant flux and transformation. Everything for Zhuangzi is constantly, constantly in flux, constantly transforming into everything else. Everything is moving constantly, and as we will see, spontaneously. That, for Zhuangzi, is the Way. The seasons change. That's the Way. Sure, grass grows and grass dies. But also grass grows, interacts with everything else in the world. When it dies, the stuff that are the grass enter the soil and that stuff goes into other things. Or before it dies, it might be eaten by say, a bird. And then the stuff that was the grass become part of the bird. And a bear may eat the bird and the stuff that was part of that bird may become part of the bear. And over time, everything is slowly becoming everything else. Over the millennia, literally all the stuff that is us, and this, and everything around us will slowly become part of everything else too. And if we could take a larger perspective, we would see a world of constant flux, constant transformation. And indeed, we would also see that everything in the world-- with as we'll see, a little exception-- everything in the world is inherently a part of this. Everything is constantly, spontaneously becoming everything else, shifting in relationship to everything else. Constant movement, constant relationships in a kind of endless movement and flux and shift. Everything is like this. When birds fly, that's what they're doing. They're flying around because they have these certain organs and they have certain faculties and they have wings. And they float around depending on the different shifting winds and the topography below them. They are spontaneously following the Way.

17 Fish, of course, swim around because they have gills and they have a tail. And they shift around with the currents, moving around with the currents, which shift around them. They're following the Way spontaneously. They don't think OK, now I should turn this way because the current is going this way, and then I'll turn that way. They just do it. They're fish. They're spontaneously part of the Way. Everything is spontaneously a part of the Way. Except I mentioned that one little exception. There's one thing in the world, in the whole cosmos as far as we can tell, that does not spontaneously follow the Way. And I'm sorry to say it's us. We alone seem to not do this. And we alone seem to not do it for a very interesting reason. You see, we have this organ called a mind. Now Zhuangzi loves the mind. It's great. As we will see, it can allow you to do unbelievable things, not least of which is write these incredible stories and incredible poems and incredible books. And as we will see, do many, many, many more things as well. It's great to have a mind, just as it would be great to have wings and fly around, and gills to swim through the oceans. It's great to have a mind. But we misuse it. The way we use our mind is something like if say, a bird were using its wings to try to swim through the oceans. It's taking something that could be incredible with how it could flow with the cosmos and instead using it to work against the cosmos, work against this endless flux and transformation. And hence, we as human beings are miserable. Because we're endlessly fighting against the Way, endlessly trying to construct lives that fight against the Way, endlessly trying to close ourselves off from this incredible endless flux and transformation. And endlessly, by battling against the Way, slowly destroying ourselves. And the result of this is clear. Because we will be miserable. We will spend our lives fighting against the Way. And we will lose. And we will pass away and we will join the rest of the cosmos, but having lived a life fighting against something that instead could've been unbelievably energizing and inspiring. And so the key for Zhuangzi, the reason he writes this text, is to open us up, to teach us how to use our mind in this exciting way that allows us to become one again with the Way. To connect with the Way and become, he will argue, an unbelievable extraordinary human being during this brief time when the stuff of us happens to be in the form of a human being. We're capable of incredible things and we cut ourselves from them. Now from this way of putting it, you might think well, at least here we've got a pretty clear cut way of getting there, right? I mean, we saw with the Laozi, it's a tough text and tough to get there. Here you might think well OK, here it's pretty clear what happens. The problem is everything in the world is spontaneously part of the flux and transformation of the Way. And if we humans are not spontaneously part of the flux and transformation of the Way because we have this mind that creates these problem, then clearly the solution is painfully obvious, right? Right? I mean, if the mind is cutting us off, what is it doing? And sure enough, he will say all that I'm about to say. It cuts us off in the following ways. It cuts us off because we try to control this flux and transformation. And we can't. We try to say OK, I will have a clear plan for my life and I will do the following. And that will be my goal and I will direct everything to that goal. Which makes perfect sense except of course, from this point of

18 view, you set the goal, you direct everything to it, you're closing your mind off from this unbelievable flux and transformation, all the things that could be exciting you and energizing you, you restrict yourself from. In fact, you literally begin forming blinders to prevent them from pulling you away from your plan. And slowly but surely, you destroy yourself. Or you try to find stable things in this world of flux and transformation. You try to say OK well, one thing I can be sure about is me, right? There's me, I know who I am. I'll look inside, find my true self, and that's just me. No. Because for Zhuangzi, you're reifying yourself. You're taking this current set of stuff that's you and saying, this is me. Well, it's you right now. But it's not what you necessarily need to be in 20, 30 years if you're opening yourself up to this constant flux and transformation and allowing yourself to be inspired and moved and created by it. How else do we do it? We try to create stable foundations for thinking. This is right, that is wrong. Well, even if at best at this particular moment, that's accurate-- and that may not be-- but even if it is, here again, create stable categories. I'll direct my life accordingly. Well then no, because you've restricted yourself. You've cut yourself off from the flux and transformation. In other words, all the ways that we act in the world, all the ways that we direct our lives, all the ways that we think about ourselves are foolish attempts to create stable things. Ourselves, goals, clear cut ways of being in the world that actually, ironically and counter intuitively are destroying ourselves. And then again, you might think OK, but again at least it's clear what we do. So we stop doing this and become spontaneous, right? If everything is spontaneously part of the Way, and we are using our mind to restrict ourselves, then we just stop doing it and we become spontaneous. So I could, for example, jump on top of here and dance if I felt like doing that, and that would be really spontaneous. And that would mean I'm part of the Way, right? No. No! Don't worry, I'm not going to do it! And the reason I'm not going to do it is because I've read the Zhuangzi. That is not, for him, spontaneity. It is not simply spontaneous to do OK, I'll do whatever I want to do. Because whatever I want to do would probably be based upon, again, all of the things we were just talking about. It would be based upon this world that we've created for ourselves. And what we think of as spontaneity is the opposite of what we usually do, right? So OK, normally I would try to give you a good lecture, and I'm sure often failing. But then to be spontaneous, I jump on here and dance. But again, that's simply the same thing as what I'm trying to otherwise do. I'm simply jumping on a table and dancing. That's not spontaneity. That's simply trying to do immediately the opposite of what I usually try to do. In itself, that is not good for Zhuangzi, to say the least. That's not spontaneity. Spontaneity actually requires altering the way we think, altering the way we act in the world, and opening ourselves up to this enduring flux and transformation, which will mean things that we could not yet imagine. It doesn't simply mean doing the opposite, the fun thing of what we normally do.