[In the essay that follows, Chan examines the way in which Chu Hsi's anthology, Reflections on Things at Hand, treats three major doctrines of Neo-Confucianism. Chan also maintains that Chu Hsi was objective in selecting and editing the sayings of the Confucian masters included in the text.]

Reflections on Things at Hand is the classic statement of Neo-Confucian philosophy by its leading exponent, Chu Hsi. It brings together the views of the Sung dynasty philosophers who met the challenge of Buddhism and formulated a new Confucian metaphysics. Stimulated by the Hua-yen philosophy of Perfect Harmony and by the psychology of Ch’an (Zen) Buddhism,¹ the Neo-Confucianists went on, under the leadership of Chou Tun-i (1017-73), Ch’eng Hao (1032-85), his brother Ch’eng I (1033-1107), Chang Tsai (1020-77), and Shao Yung (1011-77), who were called the Five Masters of the earlier period of the Sung dynasty (960-1279), to revitalize the teachings of Confucius and Mencius, give their doctrines a more rational theoretical foundation, and develop new methods of moral cultivation and study.

Broadly speaking, there are at least three major doctrines in Neo-Confucianism that are new. The most important is that principle (li) is the foundation of all truth and values. The concept of principle was not prominent in ancient Confucianism. The word li is not mentioned in the Analects.² It appears several times in the commentaries on the Book of Changes where we find “general principle,” “the principle of the world,” “following the principle of nature and destiny,” and “investigating the principle to the utmost and fully developing one's nature until destiny is fulfilled.”³ But few modern scholars accept Confucius as the author of these commentaries. One of the two greatest Confucianists in ancient times, Mencius, did speak of li in the sense of moral principles, it is true,⁴ but not in the sense of the law of being, and not as a major concept. Although the other great Confucianist, Hsün Tzu (313-238 b.c.?), spoke more often of principle,⁵ the concept still does not occupy a key position in his philosophy. During the first millennium Confucianists hardly spoke of it at all. It was instead the Neo-Taoists in the third and fourth centuries who conceived of principle as governing all existence. The Buddhists in the next several centuries followed suit by formulating their famous thesis of the harmony of principle and facts. Challenged by the Buddhists, the Neo-Confucianists seized upon the sayings in the Book of Changes and the Book of Mencius and made principle a basic concept in their philosophy. For the first time in Chinese history an entire system was built on it: that of Ch’eng I. How the Neo-Confucianists understood principle will be taken up later. The important thing to note now is that they put the whole Confucian system on a metaphysical foundation and a rational basis.⁶

To know principle and to live according to it, the Neo-Confucianists advocated the methods of the investigation of things and the exercise of seriousness. When things are investigated, one's knowledge will be extended, and when seriousness is attained, one's emotional and moral life will be correct. This methodology is utterly new in the Confucian tradition. There is no question that the dual emphasis on the extension of knowledge and the cultivation of seriousness reflects the influence of the twofold formula of wisdom and calmness in the Ch’an school.

The third innovation was the new evaluation of the Confucian Classics. The Taoists also regarded the Book of Changes as their classic, but they used it primarily for divination and similar occult practices, and thus it became associated with superstition and fantasy. Change was believed to be mysterious and controlled by spiritual beings. But since the Classic was extremely influential and popular, with a strong hold on scholars as well as on the ignorant masses, the Neo-Confucianists could not very well ignore it. Instead, they interpreted it in the spirit of rationalism and, like Chou Tun-i, used it as an intelligent explanation of the evolution of the universe, or, like Ch’eng I, as an explanation of the principles of daily human affairs. In addition, they raised the Analects, the Book of Mencius, the Great Learning, and the Doctrine of the Mean,⁷ later called the Four Books, to the level of the Classics. For a thousand years the Five Classics, namely, the Book of History, the Book of Odes, the Book of Changes, the Book of Rites, and the Spring and Autumn Annals,⁸ rather than the Four Books, were accepted and even officially sanctioned as “standards” for thought and action. But the Neo-Confucianists, especially Ch’eng Hao, Ch’eng I, and Chang Tsai, resorted more often to the Four Books than to the Five Classics for explanation and support of their views, because the Four Books dealt more directly, clearly, and simply with daily affairs and concrete situations. The Ch’eng brothers attached so much importance to the Great Learning and the Doctrine of the Mean that they took them out of the Book of Rites, in which they are chapters, and treated them as separate works. Each of them rearranged the text of the former and Ch’eng I also wrote a commentary on the latter. The new attitude implied a challenge to the traditional acceptance of the Five Classics as the only standards. More significantly, it brought Confucianism back to a vital concern with daily life.

These innovations gave Confucianism a new complexion. It has dominated Chinese life and thought from the eleventh through the nineteenth century. Even today, in spite of the onslaught by Western thought and Marxian ideology, it still has its spokesmen and may well be renewed once more.

Although this philosophy was by no means systematically formulated or presented, it was carefully thought out by Neo-Confucianists and closely followed in their own lives. Many of them wrote extensively. Others wrote little but taught through conversations with their pupils. These conversations were recorded in many volumes. The literature of Neo-Confucianism is therefore very large. But there was no single volume that could serve as a summary, introduction, or framework. An anthology was clearly needed. Chu Hsi (1130-1200) and his collaborator, Lü Tsu-ch’ien (1137-81) supplied this need by compiling the Chin-ssu lu. This is the work here translated as Reflections on Things at Hand.⁹

The story of the role each man played in the compilation, the order and contents of the work, and the sources of its selections will be taken up later.¹⁰ It is, however, necessary to note here the significance of the title. The Chinese title literally means “records of thoughts about what is near.” The term chin-ssu comes from the Analects, 19:6, where Confucius' pupil, Tzu-hsia (507-420 b.c.), says that what one thinks about should be matters near at hand. In his commentary on the saying, Chu Hsi quotes¹¹ Ch’eng Hao's statement that one should “reflect on things at hand, that is, what is in oneself,” and Ch’eng I's words: “reflecting on things at hand means to extend on the basis of similarity in kind.”¹² When asked about “extension on the basis of similarity in kind,” Chu Hsi replied that the utterance was “well said.”

One should not skip over steps or look too far [he said]. Nor should one drift in all directions or go or stop abruptly. One should start only with what one understands in things nearby and then keep on. … For example, after having gone the first step, one can, on the basis of this step, advance to the second, and so on to the third and the fourth. … When one has understood how to be affectionate to one's own parents, one will, by extension on the basis of similarity in kind, be humane to all people, for being humane to all people is of the same kind or class as being affectionate to parents. When one has understood how to be humane to people, one will feel love for all creatures, for loving all creatures is of the same kind as being humane to people.¹³

Chu Hsi believes that if one starts with one's immediate concern such as duty toward one's parents, one will eventually encompass the whole moral life as prescribed in the Confucian Classics. This is why he said that the Four Books are the ladders to the Five Classics and that the Chin-ssu lu is the ladder to the Four Books.¹⁴

The Chin-ssu lu, consisting of the works and sayings of Chou Tun-i, the Ch’eng brothers, and Chang Tsai, is not only an excellent outline of their teachings but also presents the whole Neo-Confucian philosophy in a short, yet comprehensive, survey. It brings their scattered sayings into bold relief and gives their variegated philosophy a structured whole. After a chapter on basic philosophy, the chapters proceed from personal cultivation to the regulation of the family, to national order, and then to an observation of heterodoxical systems and the dispositions of Confucian sages and worthies. Underlying all this is the basic idea of principle. Neo-Confucianism, because this idea is so fundamental to its thought, is called the School of Principle (li-hsüeh).

According to the Neo-Confucianists, for everything that exists there must be the law of being. The law is principle, according to which a thing comes into existence and has its being through the interaction of the two material forces, yin, the cosmic force of tranquillity, and yang, the cosmic force of activity. As the law of the existence of things, principle is self-evident, self-sufficient, eternal, concrete, definite, unalterable, and correct.¹⁵ It is in all things. “Every blade of grass and every tree have it,” said Ch’eng I.¹⁶ All things possess it sufficiently.¹⁷ It is the principle of the production and reproduction of things.¹⁸ And it is public, shared by all men.¹⁹

Such are the universal characteristics of principle. The Neo-Confucianists explained virtually everything in its light. Action and response between things, for example, are no longer understood as the influence of mysterious beings but as natural operations according to principle. Kuei-shen are no longer taken to be spiritual beings who control human life at their whim but are now understood, especially by Ch’eng I and Chang Tsai, as “forces of creation” and the “spontaneous activities of the material force.”²⁰ All phenomena of rising and falling, going and returning, whether in natural events or in human affairs, are to be explained in this light.²¹ Moreover, principle is the source of goodness and the standard of right and wrong. As such it is the Principle of Nature. If one obeys it and preserves it, everything will be right. The Neo-Confucianists sharply contrasted it with selfish human desires, which violate and disturb it.²²

If one understands principle clearly, one will be happy to follow it.²³ One's first task, then, is to investigate principle to the utmost. It does not matter whether one does it through study, reading books, investigating history, or handling human affairs, and does not matter whether one studies one thing deductively or many things inductively. When enough effort has been made, one will achieve a thorough understanding. When that is done, one will see the distinction between right and wrong and abandon all superstitious beliefs in spiritual beings and immortals.²⁴

Since principle is good, one's nature is good.²⁵ Evil arises because of material force, for the endowment of material force in man may be impure or unbalanced. But nature and material force are not to be diametrically opposed. Actually one involves the other. There are not two things, good and evil, opposed to each other in one's nature.²⁶ When sufficient effort has been made to remove impurities, goodness will reveal itself. One must endeavor to transform one's physical nature.²⁷ When nature is cultivated to the fullest, one's nature and destiny will be in accord with principle.²⁸

The foundation of goodness is humanity (jen).²⁹ It is one of the Five Constant Virtues, namely, humanity, righteousness, propriety, wisdom, and faithfulness, but actually it embraces all the rest because it is also virtue in the general sense.³⁰ It is essential to understand its substance, as Ch’eng Hao has strongly insisted.³¹ In essence, jen involves love for all and at the same time specific virtues in one's various social relations. In other words, in its oneness it is universal love for all, while in its multiplicity it operates as filial piety, brotherly respect, and so forth in various human relations. This is the theme of Chang Tsai's celebrated essay, the “Western Inscription.”³²Jen has two facets: self-perfection and the perfection of others. A man of jen is altruistic; he makes no distinction between himself and others.³³ Ultimately, his feeling of jen will grow so extensive as to enable him to “form one body with Heaven, Earth, and all things.”³⁴ This doctrine of the unity with all, propagated most strongly by the Ch’eng brothers and supported by all Neo-Confucianists, has become a cardinal one in the Chinese tradition.

The idea of extension is closely connected with another meaning of the word jen, namely, “seeds.” No one before the Neo-Confucianists had used the word in this sense in connection with virtue. Jen thus understood becomes the virtue of creation. As seeds produce flowers and plants, so jen produces all virtues. It is out of this creative quality that the virtues of love, compassion, and the like have come, ultimately, embracing all things. Jen is the spirit of life in all things.³⁵ It should be the spirit of man.

For the cultivation of virtue, the Neo-Confucianists were careful to strike the balance between the internal and the external. They repeatedly quoted the Book of Changes: “Seriousness to straighten the internal life and righteousness to square the external life.‘’³⁶ Seriousness³⁷ means concentration on one thing.³⁸ One will then be calm, obtain a sense of equilibrium and harmony, and be at ease with himself.³⁹ One will no longer worry, harbor selfish desires, be manipulative, or make deliberate and artificial efforts.⁴⁰ One can then “face the Lord on High,” overcome all evil, and preserve one's sincerity.⁴¹ The quality of sincerity is of special value to the Neo-Confucianists, and especially to Chou Tun-i, for whom the foundation of family harmony and national order rests on the correctness of the heart, and thus on sincerity.⁴²

Seriousness alone, however, will be useless unless it is supported by righteousness. Righteousness means the sense of right and wrong and the understanding of the correct way to do things. In short, righteousness is acting according to principle. It is not enough to be serious in one's mind about filial piety, for example. In addition, one must act correctly in the actual service of one's parents. Both seriousness and righteousness must be established and they must support each other.⁴³

As seriousness must be coupled with righteousness, so must it be coupled with knowledge. Ch’eng I's saying, “Self-cultivation requires seriousness; the pursuit of learning depends on extension of knowledge,” has become an axiom in the Neo-Confucian school.⁴⁴ The Neo-Confucianists were emphatic in urging one to study, for otherwise, they said, one will decline.⁴⁵

In the matter of extension of knowledge, the Neo-Confucianists were extremely critical of the prevalent habits of memorization, recitation of texts, and devotion to literary studies and flowery compositions. It seemed to them that these habits destroy one's purpose in life.⁴⁶ Instead, one must look for and understand principle in the written word. One must probe and examine the principles of things.⁴⁷ One must think, for thought is the source of learning, and one must reflect repeatedly over one thing after another, until one's understanding is penetrating and profound.⁴⁸ One must also know how to doubt.⁴⁹ Most important, one must get at the essentials, explore them, and get a real appreciation of them, so that one will achieve something new every day and advance every day.⁵⁰ There is no harm in differing from others in the interpretation of the Classics. The main thing is to acquire something in a natural way.⁵¹

The achievement of knowledge is, of course, for the purpose of application. In Neo-Confucianism, as in Confucianism throughout the ages, knowledge and action are of equal importance. The achievement of knowledge is the beginning of learning, while practicing knowledge with effort is its end.⁵²

The practice of moral virtue begins with filial piety and brotherly respect, for they are the foundation on which one's nature will be developed and one's destiny fulfilled. In fact, this development and fulfillment can be accomplished in the very acts of filial piety and brotherly respect.⁵³ One should obey one's parents. However, one's chief objective is to help them and lead them so that they will not go astray from righteousness.⁵⁴ Between husband and wife, the lines of superiority and inferiority are to be strictly drawn. Widows are not to remarry, for by doing so they would lose their integrity. In the opinion of Ch’eng I, if a widow is poor, it is better for her to starve to death than to remarry. “To starve to death is a very small matter,” he said. “To lose one's integrity, however, is a very serious matter.”⁵⁵ This is perhaps the most extreme statement in the Chin-ssu lu, the most controversial, and, in the twentieth century, the most condemned.⁵⁶ However, if Ch’eng's attitude toward the widow is too strict, we must not forget that his primary concern was integrity.

As to the family as a whole, there should be personal affection among members of the family, and there should be monthly banquets to strengthen the bond of the clan, but personal affection must be in accord with righteousness.⁵⁷ The genealogy of the clan should be clarified, family property should be kept together under one head, and the ancient system of heads of descent should be restored so the head of each branch of the clan can be clearly identified. The people will then be held together, will have a sense of community, and will not forget their source. In this sense the system of heads of descent is based on the Principle of Nature. For everything must be traced to its source.⁵⁸

Integrity is also the keynote in the Neo-Confucianists' attitude toward government service. To them, whether or not to serve in the government was a matter of the most serious consideration. In their opinion there was nothing wrong in taking the civil service examinations or accepting government positions, but these must not be allowed to destroy one's moral purpose.⁵⁹ One should go forward to serve only when the time is right. In any case, whether one advances or retires, one should be in accord with the correct principle. Righteousness should be the only standard of action, regardless of what one's fate may be.⁶⁰ Righteousness and profit are to be sharply distinguished, for the former leads to impartiality and the latter to selfishness.⁶¹ One should not be motivated by profit. In all activities in the government one should be guided only by moral principles.⁶²

The government, too, must be guided by these principles. The best government is one in which “the correctness of the Principle of Nature is achieved and the ultimate of human relations is fulfilled.”⁶³ This can be accomplished only by practicing moral principles instead of resorting to political technique.⁶⁴ But this does not mean that there should be no governmental measures. Rather, it means that the measures must be governed by righteousness and humanity; otherwise they would be no better than the methods or tricks of despots.⁶⁵ In sharp contrast to despots, whose works are primarily for their own success and profit, the true king will institute ceremonies and promote moral education. He will establish schools to teach not only practical duties but also filial piety, brotherly respect, faithfulness, and loyalty.⁶⁶ His laws will be few and his punishments will be light. He will be devoted to the social and economic welfare of his people.⁶⁷

This comprehensive philosophy is embraced in 622 passages which Chu Hsi, with the help of Lü Tsu-ch’ien, selected from the works and recorded sayings of the four Masters. Chu Hsi listed in the Chin-ssu lu fourteen works from which the selections were made. They are:

Master Chou's “T’ai-chi t’ung-shu” (The diagram of the Great Ultimate and the book penetrating the Book of Changes by Chou Tun-i)

Master Ming-tao's Wen-chi (Collection of literary works by Master Ch’eng Hao)

Master I-ch’uan's Wen-chi (Collection of literary works by Master Ch’eng I)

Ch’eng's I chuan (Ch’eng I's commentary on the Book of Changes)

Ch’eng's Ching shuo (Ch’eng I's explanations of the Classics)

Ch’engs' I-shu (Surviving works of the two Ch’engs)

Ch’engs' Wai-shu (Additional works of the two Ch’engs)

Master Heng-ch’ü's Cheng-meng (Master Chang Tsai's Correcting Youthful Ignorance)

Master Heng-ch’ü's Wen-chi (Collection of literary works by Master Chang Tsai)

Master Heng-ch’ü's I shuo (Master Chang Tsai's explanations of the Book of Changes)

Master Heng-ch’ü's Li-yüeh shuo (Master Chang Tsai's explanations of ceremonies and music)

Master Heng-ch’ü's Lun-yü shuo (Master Chang Tsai's explanations of the Analects)

Master Heng-ch’ü's Meng Tzu shuo (Master Chang Tsai's explanations of the Book of Mencius)

Master Heng-ch’ü's Yü-lu (Recorded conversations of Master Chang Tsai)⁶⁸

Many things have happened to these works since Chu Hsi's time. Some have been altered and others have disappeared.⁶⁹ The selections are now found in the following works:

chou tun-i:

T’ai-chi-t’u shuo (Explanation of the diagram of the Great Ultimate)⁷⁰

T’ung-shu (Penetrating the Book of Changes)⁷¹

Both are included in the Chou Tzu ch’üan-shu (Complete works of Master Chou).

the two ch’engs:

Ming-tao wen-chi (Collection of literary works by Ch’eng Hao)⁷²

I-ch’uan wen-chi (Collection of literary works by Ch’eng I)⁷³

I-shu (Surviving works)⁷⁴

Wai-shu (Additional works)⁷⁵

I chuan (Commentary on the Book of Changes)⁷⁶

Ching shuo (Explanations of the Classics)⁷⁷

The above works of the Ch’eng brothers, plus the Ts’ui-yen (Pure words), which contains additional conversations, make up the Erh-Ch’eng ch’üan-shu (Complete works of the two Ch’engs).

chang tsai:

Cheng-meng (Correcting youthful ignorance)⁷⁸

I shuo (Commentary on the Book of Changes)⁷⁹

Yü-lu (Recorded conversations)⁸⁰

All the above are included in the Chang Tzu ch’üan-shu (Complete works of Master Chang).⁸¹

The collections of conversations supplied the majority of the 622 selections. Most of the selections, probably more than half, have come from Ch’eng I, between 67 and 162 from Ch’eng Hao, 110 from Chang Tsai, and 12 from Chou Tun-i.⁸² Many of the works listed above are very short.

The four philosophers dedicated their lives to elucidating and spreading the Confucian doctrine. They accepted governmental positions with the greatest reluctance, prefering to remain poor and teach. Compared with other Confucianists, they wrote little. Chou wrote only a short work, and Ch’eng Hao did not write any book at all.

Chou was a native of Tao-chou (present Tao County, Honan Province). His personal name was Tun-i and his courtesy name Mao-shu. He named his study after the stream Lien-hsi, also pronounced Lien-ch’i (Stream of waterfalls), which he loved, and posterity has honored him by calling him Master Lien-hsi. He also loved lotus flowers ardently, evidently because of their purity and tranquillity. His love for life was so strong that he would not cut the grass outside his window.⁸³ The two Ch’eng brothers, who studied under him in 1046-47, were influenced by him in every way, including their decision not to take the civil service examinations or engage in hunting.⁸⁴ Because Chou was a great admirer of Buddhism, Ch’eng I called him the “poor Zen fellow.”⁸⁵ But actually Buddhist influence on Chou was negligible. In fact, he may be said to have set the course for Neo-Confucianism in such a way that neither Buddhist nor Taoist influence could change its fundamentally Confucian character.

In official life Chou was, among other things, district keeper of records, or assistant magistrate (1040), magistrate in various counties (1046-54), prefectural staff supervisor (1056-59), and professor of the directorate of education and assistant prefect (1061-64). It was when he was prefect in Nan-k’ang in Modern Kiangsi Province in 1071 that he built his study, “Stream of Waterfalls.” He resigned from his governmental position in 1071, eighteen months before he died.⁸⁶ It was said of him that his mind “was free, pure and unobstructed, like the breeze on a sunny day and the clear moon,” and that “in his governmental administration, he was careful and strict, and treated others like himself. He saw to it that he was in complete accord with moral principles.”⁸⁷

The Ch’eng brothers were sons of a chief officer. When they were fourteen of fifteen, they made up their minds to learn to be sages,⁸⁸ studying not only under Chou Tun-i, but also under Chang Tsai, their uncle.

Ch’eng Hao's courtesy name was Po-ch’un. When he was fifteen or sixteen, he heard Chou Tun-i lecture on the Way and gave up the idea of taking civil service examinations. He went in and out of the Taoist and Buddhist schools for almost ten years before he returned to Confucianism.⁸⁹ After he obtained the “presented scholar” degree in 1057 he was successively a keeper of records in two counties and scored great success in averting a famine by saving the dikes, in equalizing taxes, and in rehabilitating prisoners. Later he was magistrate for three years (1065-67), during which he established schools, organized community societies, brought about peace and order, and gained the great affection of the populace. In 1070 he became under-secretary of the heir apparent. Emperor Shen-tsung (r. 1068-85) gave him a number of audiences and was much impressed with his recommendations. But Ch’eng Hao strongly opposed Wang An-shih (1021-86) in his radical reforms. In his conversations with the emperor, he stressed the Confucian doctrines of sincerity and humanity and would not even refer to profit or success. This was an indirect way of attacking the utilitarianism of Wang's reforms. Their conflict gradually became more open and bitter. As a result, in 1071, Ch’eng was demoted to the position of assistant prefect. In 1078-80 he was once more a magistrate but his political enemies finally had him dismissed. The new emperor, Che-tsung (r. 1086-93), appointed him a bureau assistant executive, but before he could take office he died.

Ch’eng Hao was warm and peaceful in disposition.⁹⁰ A pupil who followed him for thirty years never saw him show anger or even a harsh expression.⁹¹ His elucidation of the Confucian doctrine was thought so profound and his influence so great that he was called Master Ming-tao (Illumination of the Way). His brother believed that, in the centuries since Confucius and Mencius, Ming-tao was the first to represent the authentic transmission of the Way of the Sages.⁹²

Ch’eng I's courtesy name was Cheng-shu. Because he and his brother lived in the I River area in Honan, he was called Master I-ch’uan (I River). In 1056 he and his brother entered the national university where he was so outstanding that a schoolmate treated him as a teacher. At the age of twenty-five (1057) he entreated the emperor in a memorial to practice the Confucian kingly way. Two years later he obtained the “presented scholar” degree. He lived and taught in Lo-yang in Honan, and repeatedly declined high offices, including a professorship at the directorate of education in 1085. Thus, even at the age of fifty-three, he did not care to be an official. Finally, in 1086, he became junior expositor in waiting. For twenty months he lectured the emperor on Confucian principles and attracted many followers. Although he had to borrow money to live at this time, he neither sent in his application for salary, nor requested for his wife the honor to which she was entitled, for he felt the initiative should not come from him.⁹³ His sense of moral integrity was uncompromising, but his firm attitude, his critical opinions, and his outspokenness created bitter enemies, one of the most important of whom was Su Shih (Su Tung-p’o, 1036-1101), leader of the Szechuan group. This led to the bitter factional struggle between that group and the Lo-yang group led by Ch’eng I. In 1087 Ch’eng I was appointed head of the directorate of education in the western capital Lo-yang but resigned a few months later. When he was again head of the directorate in 1092, censors repeatedly petitioned for his impeachment. At last he resigned. In 1097 his teachings were prohibited, his land was confiscated, and he was banished to Fu-chou Prefecture (modern Fu-ling County in Szechuan). He was pardoned three years later and resumed his position at the directorate. By that time, government persecution of factions had become severe. Both he and Su Shih, along with several hundred other scholars, were blacklisted. His followers left him. In 1103 his books were destroyed and his teachings were once more prohibited. He was pardoned in 1106, a year before he died, but the ban on his teachings remained until 1155. By that time, however, Chu Hsi was twenty-five years old. Before long he began to promote Cheng I's doctrines, and their teaching soon became the basis of a concerted philosophical movement.⁹⁴

The two brothers were as widely different in temperament as can be imagined. Ch’eng Hao was warm, always at ease, tolerant, agreeable, understanding, and amiable. Ch’eng I, on the other hand, was stern, grave, strict, forthright, and so self-controlled that when a boat he was riding in seemed about to sink, he kept his composure.⁹⁵ Such was the difference between the dispositions of the brothers⁹⁶. Perhaps the most dramatic illustration of the effect they had on people is that once, when they entered a hall, everybody followed Ch’eng Hao to one side, while no one followed Ch’eng I to the other.⁹⁷

Chang Tsai's courtesy name was Tzu-hou. He was a native of the town of Heng-ch’ü in modern Mei County, Shensi Province, and was therefore also called Master Heng-ch’ü. In his youth he loved military arts. At twenty-one he wrote to the outstanding scholar official, Fan Chung-yen (969-1052), whom he later visited and who told him to study the Doctrine of the Mean. Still not satisfied with Confucian learning, he turned to Buddhism and Taoism for years, but finally returned to the Confucian Classics, especially the Book of Changes and the Doctrine of the Mean, which eventually formed the basis of his philosophy. In 1056, when he lectured on the Book of Changes in the capital, his students included the prominent Neo-Confucianist and statesman, Ssu-ma Kuang (1019-86), and two of his own nephews, the Ch’eng brothers. He obtained a “presented scholar” degree in 1057 and was appointed a magistrate. In 1069 he pleased the emperor with his orthodox Confucian answers to questions on government and was appointed a collator in the imperial library. In his political views, however, he was at odds with the reformer Wang An-shih, for he insisted on reviving ancient Confucian economic systems, including the “well-field” system. Under this system a field was divided into nine squares and assigned to eight families each of which cultivated one square separately for its own support and joined in cultivating the ninth square for governmental revenues. Chang retired from minor governmental positions to farm and attempted to persuade other scholars to join him in practicing the “well-field” system. Although he was extremely poor, he would sit calmly all day, thinking, reading, or having discussions with his students. He was greatly loved by his pupils and the community alike. In 1077 he was a director of the board of imperial sacrifices but, because his proposal for restoring ancient rites was not accepted, he resigned. He became ill and died on his way home.⁹⁸ A contemporary said of him, “The Master was firm and resolute in nature. His virtue was eminent and his appearance dignified. But in his association with people, he became more intimate with them as time went on. In regulating his family and in dealing with others, his basic principle was to correct himself in order to influence others. If people did not believe in him, he would examine himself and set himself right but would say nothing about the matter. Although some people might not understand his ideas, he would conduct himself naturally and equally without regret. Therefore, whether people knew him or not, they all submitted to him when they heard of his disposition, and dared not do him the slightest wrong.”⁹⁹ This is perhaps an idealization, but no one doubts the essential soundness of the characterization, for Chang Tsai was a most respected scholar and teacher of his time.

Shao Yung supported himself by farming and called himself “Mr. Happiness” and his home “Happy Nest.” He was so well liked that, when he went around Lo-yang in a small cart, people both rich and poor, hearing the sound of his cart, would come out and say, “Our Master is coming!” And he was so much respected that many prominent scholars and officials, including the eminent Ssu-ma Kuang, often visited him. The Ch’eng brothers too were his great friends. About 1060 he was keeper of records in the board of public works and about a decade later he was a militia judge. In both functions his rank was that of an assistant executive.¹⁰⁰

Chang was senior to the Ch’eng brothers, but in the Chin-ssu lu, both in the list of books from which the selections were made and in the order of the selections themselves, Chang always follows the Ch’engs. In Chu Hsi's belief, Neo-Confucianism was founded by Chou Tun-i and developed by the Ch’eng brothers, particularly by Ch’eng I. To him, Chang Tsai comes after the Ch’engs, so far as the transmission of the Confucian tradition is concerned. Whether it is correct or not, this is the line of transmission fixed by Chu Hsi.

Another direct result of Chu Hsi's personal views is the omission of Shao Yung from the anthology.¹⁰¹ One reason for this is that Shao Yung did not devote much discussion to the central Confucian problems of humanity and righteousness. In other words, he had nothing to add to what the Four Masters had to say. But a more important reason is that Shao Yung's philosophy is too similar to Taoist occultism to suit Chu Hsi. In Shao's cosmology, change is due to spirit, which gives rise to number, number to form, and form to concrete things. Since the Great Ultimate engenders the four forms of major and minor yin and yang, Shao used the number four to classify all phenomena, so that there are the four seasons, the four heavenly bodies, the four kinds of rulers, the four periods of history, and so forth. Because elements of the universe are calculable, the best knowledge is objective, that is, “viewing things as things.” This mechanistic philosophy is of Taoist origin and is clearly out of harmony with Neo-Confucianism as developed by the Four Masters. According to the records,¹⁰² Shao Yung learned indirectly from a Taoist priest certain diagrams connected with the Book of Changes, out of which his theory of diagrams and numbers evolved.

Chu Hsi's dislike for Taoism is shown not only in his omission of Shao Yung but also in his editing of one of Ch’eng I’s essays.¹⁰³ In the original there are these two sentences, “This is called turning the original nature into the feeling” and “This is called turning the feeling into nature,” which Chu Hsi deleted. The first sentence comes from the commentary on the Book of Changes by Wang Pi (226-49), the Neo-Taoist. There is no doubt that Chu Hsi omitted the sentences because they express the Taoistic idea that while nature is good, feelings are evil, a position Neo-Confucianists would not accept. In doing so, Chu Hsi was also loyal to Ch’eng I, for Ch’eng I would not contrast the two.

This is the only place where Chu Hsi's editing affects the sense of any passage, if only by implication. Otherwise he was quite objective both in his selection and in his editing. Ch’eng I often interpreted the sayings of Confucius and Mencius in his own way. Chu Hsi did not substitute the original meaning for Ch’eng I’s versions. Instead, he presented Ch’eng I’s interpretations and then pointed out the ways in which they modified the original. For example, although in the Analects the term chih-ming means giving up one's life, Ch’eng I gave it the meaning of investigating fate to the utmost. This fact is pointed out in Chu Hsi's commentary.¹⁰⁴ Nevertheless Chu Hsi did not hesitate to criticize Ch’eng I when he disagreed with him. For example, Ch’eng I felt one should be free from contact with external things, but Chu Hsi said that this was not possible.¹⁰⁵ In one case, Ch’eng understood “order” to mean correct principles, but Chu Hsi preferred to understand it as governmental order.¹⁰⁶ He also questioned Ch’eng I’s contention that feelings should not be called the mind.¹⁰⁷

Perhaps the best illustration of Chu Hsi's objectivity is his liberal quotation from Ch’eng I’s commentary on the Book of Changes. There are more selections from this than from any other single work, although the largest group of extracts comes from collections of the two Ch’engs' sayings.¹⁰⁸ Chu Hsi and Ch’eng I differed fundamentally on the nature of the Book of Changes. Chu Hsi regarded it as primarily a book for divination whereas Ch’eng I took it to be an explanation of principle.¹⁰⁹ Again and again Ch’eng I drew from it lessons on the Mean and correctness.¹¹⁰ Chu Hsi thought that Ch’eng I’s interpretation of the book was not in accordance with its original meaning, and that consequently his comments and the text on which he commented often did not agree. Besides, Chu Hsi said, Ch’eng I’s comments were often too general and abstract and therefore very difficult to understand.¹¹¹ In spite of all this, however, Chu Hsi drew heavily on the commentaries because, as he said, every paragraph is necessary for our practical effort and the book is therefore of great benefit to the student.¹¹² Chu Hsi's whole purpose was an anthology that should present Neo-Confucianism as comprehensively and yet as concisely as possible and at the same time should contribute in a concrete way to the improvement of the reader's daily life.

The Chin-ssu lu became one of the most important books in Chinese thought. It is the first of the Neo-Confucian collections, some of which became classics in their own right and served for centuries as official tests in civil service examinations. It has inspired and set the pattern for anthologies of Chu Hsi's sayings and those of other Neo-Confucianists from Chu Hsi's own time to the nineteenth century.¹¹³ Scholars have treated the Chin-ssu lu as a source book in Neo-Confucianism, in spite of the fact that it is only an anthology. Commentaries on it were written over the centuries by leading Confucianists in Korea as well as in China. In Japan it was widely commented on and exercised considerable influence during the Tokugawa period (1603-1867). This was due to the efforts of Yamazaki Ansai (1618-82), a towering Confucianist in Japanese history, whose followers totaled six thousand. Because he was not satisfied with the commentary of Yeh Ts’ai (fl. 1248),¹¹⁴ he published the Chin-ssu lu without it, provided his own commentary, and required his pupils to read the anthology. As a result, many of his followers wrote on the Chin-ssu lu which became indispensable to an understanding of the thought of the Tokugawa period.¹¹⁵

The influence of the Chin-ssu lu was due not only to the importance of the Four Masters' philosophy but also to Chu Hsi himself for, outside of Confucius and Mencius, he has had a greater impact on Chinese, Korean, and Japanese thought than any other Confucianist.

Chu Hsi was born in Yu-hsi County, Fukien, in 1130, son of a former district sheriff who later became assistant department director of the ministry of personnel. He obtained the “presented scholar” degree in 1148. From 1153 to 1158 he was district keeper of records (assistant magistrate) of T’ung-an County in Fukien, where he promoted education, founded a library, and regulated civil ceremonies. In 1179 he became prefect of Nan-k’ang Prefecture in present Kiangsi. While there, he alleviated economic suffering, built a temple for Chou Tun-i, and reestablished the White Deer Grotto Academy, an important institution that was to play a great role in Neo-Confucianism. When his term expired in 1181, he was appointed superintendent designate of “ever-normal graneries, tea, and salt” in charge of finance and taxation in Chiang-nan West, and later appointed to the same position in Chekiang East¹¹⁶ where there was a famine. He established community granaries and impeached many officials and big families in the stricken area.¹¹⁷ Six years later, in 1187, he was judicial intendant of Chiang-nan West. From 1190 to 1191 he was prefect of Chang-chou Prefecture in Fukien where he promoted moral education but failed in his attempts at land and tax reforms. In 1194 he was prefect of T’an-chou Prefecture¹¹⁸ in Human for one month, just long enough to persuade the rebellious aboriginals to surrender. When Emperor Ning-tsung (r. 1194-1224) ascended the throne later that year, Chu Hsi became lecturer in waiting for forty-six days expounding the Great Learning. Because he repeatedly attacked a powerful official before the emperor, he was relieved and went home.¹¹⁹

Thus for almost fifty years after he received his degree he was in the government for only nine years and in court for merely forty-six days. He presented three sealed memorials to Emperor Hsiao-tsung (r. 1162-89): in 1162 when he urged him to practice the teachings of the Great Learning, not to make peace with the Chin invaders, and to put worthy men in office;¹²⁰ in 1180 when he insisted that economic distress, military weakness, and political corruption can be removed only if the ruler rectifies his mind, and thus made the emperor furious;¹²¹ and in 1188 when he advocated fundamental reforms.¹²² He also had three audiences with the emperor: in 1163 when he reiterated the points of his memorial of 1162;¹²³ in 1181 when he took the emperor to task for allowing wicked officials to rule;¹²⁴ and in 1188 when he emphasized that only when the Principle of Nature overcomes human selfish desires, the mind is rectified, and the will becomes sincere can economic difficulties be removed, the government be reformed, and the enemy be repulsed.¹²⁵

In between these political activities, he declined many positions.¹²⁶ Often he pleaded a foot ailment but actually he was unwilling to support appeasers and corrupt officials whose hatred of him was considerable. In 1188, for example, when he declined a directorship in the army department, a vice minister of the department itself, who disagreed with him in the interpretations of the Book of Changes and Chang Tsai's “Western Inscription,” attached him as an ignoramus plagiarizing Ch’eng I and Chang Tsai.¹²⁷

During most of his life he was granted a temple guardianship,¹²⁸ often at his request, a sinecure which did not remove his poverty but enabled him to stay home with leisure to write, teach, and talk with the most outstanding scholars of the day. Thus he devoted his life to the development of Neo-Confucianism which he inherited from Li T’ung (Li Yen-p’ing, 1093-1163), whom he visited in 1158, 1160, and 1162, and from whom he received instructions during each of the several-months-long visits. But the Neo-Confucian philosophy was a dangerous doctrine to corrupt officialdom. By 1196 government attacks on Neo-Confucianism as “false learning” had become intense. The teachings of Ch’eng I and others were proscribed. A powerful censor impeached Chu Hsi for ten crimes, including “false learning,” and an official candidate even petitioned for his execution.¹²⁹ He was dismissed from a new appointment and from his temple guardianship. The attack on “false learning” became more severe in 1197 and 1198. But he had his loyal followers. When he died in 1200 several thousand people attended his funeral. When the political climate improved, nine years later, he was honored with the posthumous title of Wen (Culture).¹³⁰ In 1230 he was given the title of State Duke of Hui, and in 1241 he was accorded sacrifice in the Confucian temple.¹³¹

He wrote almost a hundred works in the fields of philosophy, history, religion, literature, and biography. Many of these are no longer extant. It was he who grouped the Great Learning, the Doctrine of the Mean, the Analects, and the Book of Mancius as the Four Books. He wrote commentaries on many Confucian Classics but paid special attention to the Four Books, on which he wrote not only commentaries but also books to explain these commentaries. Three days before he died he was still working on the commentary on the Great Learning. In 1313 an imperial decree ordered that his and Ch’eng I’s commentaries on the Four Books and the Five Classics be the standard official interpretations and the basis for the civil service examinations. They remained the authorities until the examinations were abolished in 1905. Thus for almost six hundred years they were the political Bible of the Chinese, so to speak.

Lü Tsu-ch’ien, whose courtesy name was Po-kung, was a native of Chin-hua County in modern Chekiang Province. Because his ancestral home was Tung-lai¹³² in modern Shantung, he was also called Master Tung-lai.

He obtained the “presented scholar” degree in 1163 and became a professor at the national university and also a compiler in the bureau of national history. In his audiences with the emperor, he always urged the ruler to pay attention to Confucian teachings. Later he was appointed an examiner of top level civil service personnel and served until he resigned to mourn his father's death. When the three-year mourning period was over, he was appointed director of the imperial library and a compiler in the bureau of national history. After his task was completed he was transferred to the position of staff author but he declined the post and returned home. Subsequently he became a guardian of two temples, one after the other.

He wrote extensively, though not so extensively as Chu Hsi. While Chu Hsi was an authority on philosophy, Lü Tsu-ch’ien was original and expert in the discussion of history. He and Chang Shih (Chang Nan-hsien, 1133-80) were constant companions to Chu Hsi in conversation and correspondence, and the three were called the Three Worthies of the Southeast.¹³³

Lü studied under a pupil of the Ch’eng brothers, but while Chu Hsi perpetuated and developed their doctrines, Lü traveled in a different direction. At that time there were within Neo-Confucianism three rival schools of thought, namely, the rationalistic school of Chu Hsi, the idealistic school of Lu Hsiang-shan (Lu Chiu-yüan, 1139-93), and the East Chekiang school, of which Lü was a leader. Lu Hsiang-shan, instead of stressing the investigation of principles in things, as did Chu Hsi, taught the investigation of the mind, for he believed that principles are identical with the mind. Lü Tsu-ch’ien did not go to either extreme but attempted a compromise. The importance of the Chekiang school lies in the fact that it aimed at practical results and the concrete application of Confucian thought to social, economic, and political life. In many respects he was a greater rival of Chu Hsi than Lu Hsiang-shan was. But they were also good friends. They joined their efforts in compiling the Chin-ssu lu in the belief that Neo-Confucianism was a sound philosophy of life and that the anthology would be a useful guide to the essentials of that philosophy.

It is interesting and instructive to see what Chu Hsi himself thought of the book. The following quotations express his opinions on this subject:

The fundamentals of self-cultivation are completely covered in the Hsiao-hsüeh [Elementary education],¹³⁴ while refined and subtle principles are fully treated in the Chin-ssu lu.¹³⁵

The Chin-ssu lu is worth reading. The Four Books are the ladders to the Six Classics.¹³⁶ The Chin-ssu lu is the ladder to the Four Books.

Everything in the Chin-ssu lu is intimately connected with man's life and can save him from defects.

Chang¹³⁷ was commenting on how practical and close to human life the sayings in the Chin-ssu lu are. Chu Hsi said, “The Sage and the worthies¹³⁸ put things plainly. For example, the Doctrine of the Mean, the Great Learning, the Analects, and the Book of Mencius are all plain and simple. The Chin-ssu lu, however, are words of men of recent times. They are more intimately connected with our lives.”

Someone asked about the Chin-ssu lu. Chu Hsi said, “Suppose you read the Great Learning thoroughly, and then go right on to the Analects and the Book of Mencius. The Chin-ssu lu is difficult to read.”

The first chapter of the Chin-ssu lu is difficult to read. This is the reason I talked the matter over with Po-kung and asked him to write a few words as postscript.¹³⁹ If one reads this chapter only, he will be unable to relate to life the principles he finds in it. Stopping there would be like halting one's troops outside the strong defenses of a city. It would be far better to read the Analects and the Book of Mencius, which are plain and straightforward and can be enjoyed.

In reading the Chin-ssu lu, if the student does not understand the first chapter, he should begin with the second and the third. In time he will gradually understand the first chapter.

When Fei-ch’ing¹⁴⁰ was asked how he was getting along with the Chin-ssu lu, he said that there were many doubtful points. Chu Hsi said, “If one hurriedly reads it for the first time, it is difficult, that is true. Sometimes it says something first this way but later that way, or says one thing here and a different thing there. However, if one reads it carefully again and again, one will find in it a certain direction. When a searching effort has been made to understand forty or fifty sections, one will find that there is only one principle running through all. I-ch’uan said that principle cannot be investigated to the utmost in one day and that when one has investigated a great deal, one will thoroughly understand it.”¹⁴¹

The Chin-ssu lu discusses very keenly the defects of the patterns of learning in recent times. It will be fine if one can read it along with [the Four Books].¹⁴²

The Chin-ssu lu is fundamentally for the student who cannot read all the works of the several Masters. For this reason the most important passages and those of immediate concern have been selected so the student can gradually enter into the Way. If he thoroughly understands these, he will extend on the basis of similarity in kind, to understand the rest and thus achieve an extensive learning. If he does not read it thoroughly, he cannot understand even this book of several chapters. How can he have the energy or time to read all the works listed in the beginning of the book?¹⁴³

In the Chin-ssu lu what Master Heng-ch’ü [Chang Tsai] has to say about the order of reading books is excellent. Try to think about it and you will get the idea.¹⁴⁴

Notes

1. See Wing-tsit Chan, A Source Book in Chinese Philosophy, chaps. 25, 26.

2. For this book, see below, ch. 3, n. 59.

3. Book of Changes, commentary on hexagram no. 2, k’un (Earth) (Yi King, tr. by James Legge, p. 420); “Appended Remarks,” pt. 1, ch. 1 (Legge, p. 349); “Remarks on Certain Trigrams,” ch. 2 (Legge, p. 423); ibid., ch. 1 (Legge, p. 422), respectively. For this Classic, see below, ch. 1, n. 12.

4. Book of Mencius, 6A:7. The word also appears in 7B:19 and 5B:1, but there it means “to depend” and “to order,” respectively. For the Book of Mencius, see below, ch. 3, n. 68.

5. In the Hsün Tzu, chs. 1, 2, 5, 7-9, 11, 15, 17-23, 26-28. For an English translation, see Homer H. Dubs, The Works of Hsüntze. Chs. 1, 2, 15, 17, and 19-23 have been translated by Burton Watson in Hsün Tzu: Basic Writings.

6. For a discussion of Chinese philosophers' concepts of principle, see Wingtsit Chan, “The Evolution of the Neo-Confucian Concept Li as Principle,” Tsing Hua Journal of Chinese Studies, IV (No. 2, 1964), 123-49.

7. For the Great Learning and the Doctrine of the Mean, see below, ch. 2, n. 182.

8. See below, ch. 1, n. 12, for the Book of Changes; ch. 3, n. 47, for the Book of Odes; ch. 3, n. 90, for the Book of History; and ch. 3, n. 128, for the Spring and Autumn Annals. The fifth Classic, the ancient classic on rites, is no longer extant but has been replaced by the Li chi, or Book of Rites, a collection of treatises on rituals and detailed prescriptions for social ceremonies, religious rites, and governmental and diplomatic etiquette, and the principles underlying them, traditionally ascribed to pupils of Confucius but probably compiled many centuries later. For an English translation of the Li chî, see The Li Ki, tr. by James Legge.

   These Five Classics and the Book of Music constituted the ancient Six Classics, but the latter, if it ever existed, was lost before the third century b.c. and since the Sung dynasty (960-1279) has been replaced by the Chou-li. For the Chou-li, see below, ch. 3, n. 154.

   Tradition ascribed the original Six Classics to Confucius. Most modern scholars, however, believe that they were compiled later.

9. For other translations of the title, see below, “On Translating Certain Chinese Philosophical Terms,” pp. 360-61.

10. See below, pp. 309 ff., 323 ff.

11. See Chu Hsi, Lun-yü chi-chu, ch. 10, commenting on the Analects, 19:6.

12. Wai-shu, 6:9a and I-shu, 22A:5a, respectively. For the latter saying, see below, ch. 3, sec. 14.

13. Chu Tzu yü-lei, 49:5a-b. The three steps of affection to parents, being humane to all people, and love for all creatures are taught in the Book of Mencius, 7A:45.

14. Chu Tzu yü-lei, 105:4b. His famous pupil, Huang Kan (1152-1221), claimed that Chu Hsi did not say so (see Huang Mien-chai chi, 2:2a), but since the statement is recorded by Chu Hsi's equally famous pupil, Ch’en Ch’un (1153-1217), there is no reason to doubt its authenticity, especially in view of the importance Chu Hsi attached to the work. It is possible that Huang never heard the statement.

15. See below, ch. 2, secs. 8, 29; ch. 7, sec. 25; ch. 12, sec. 12.

16. Ch. 1, sec. 15; ch. 3, sec. 12.

17. Ch. 1, sec. 18.

18. Ch. 1, sec. 33.

19. Ch. 12, sec. 9.

20. Ch. 1, secs. 5, 8, 19, 46.

21. Ch. 1, sec. 13; ch. 8, sec. 10.

22. Ch. 2, secs. 8, 85; ch. 4, sec. 26; ch. 8, secs. 2, 12; ch. 12, sec. 21.

23. Ch. 3, sec. 8.

24. Ch. 3, secs. 5, 9; ch. 7, sec. 25; ch. 13, sec. 10.

25. Ch. 1, secs. 38-41.

26. Ch. 1, sec. 21; ch. 2, sec. 30.

27. Ch. 1, sec. 21; ch. 2, secs. 80, 100.

28. Ch. 1, sec. 38; ch. 2, sec. 81.

29. For the translation of this word, see below, “On Translating Certain Chinese Philosophical Terms,” pp. 365-66.

30. Ch. 1, secs. 6, 11, 23.

31. Ch. 2, sec. 20.

32. Ch. 2, sec. 89.

33. Ch. 2, sec. 52.

34. Ch. 1, sec. 20.

35. Ch. 1, secs. 23, 36.

36. Ch. 2, secs. 7, 16, 44; ch. 4, sec. 44; ch. 13, sec. 3.

37. Ching is often translated as “reverence.” For the translation “seriousness,” see below, “On Translating Certain Chinese Philosophical Terms,” pp. 361-62.

38. Ch. 4, secs. 44, 45, 48.

39. Ch. 4, secs. 16, 25, 27, 47.

40. Ch. 2, secs. 54, 78; ch. 4, secs. 24, 25, 27, 28.

41. Ch. 4, secs. 37, 38, 44.

42. Ch. 8, sec. 1. For other ideas on sincerity, see ch. 1, secs. 2, 31; ch. 2, secs. 16, 17, 19; ch. 4, sec. 28.

43. Ch. 2, secs. 7, 34, 60, 61.

44. Ch. 2, sec. 58.

45. Ch. 2, sec. 35.

46. Ch. 2, secs. 27, 56, 57.

47. Ch. 3, secs. 19, 25.

48. Ch. 3, secs. 6, 10, 22.

49. Ch. 2, sec. 102; ch. 3, sec. 15.

50. Ch. 2, sec. 67; ch. 3, secs. 33, 35, 36.

51. Ch. 2, sec. 41; ch. 3, sec. 33.

52. Ch. 2, sec. 6.

53. Ch. 6, sec. 11.

54. Ch. 6, sec. 3.

55. Ch. 6, sec. 13.

56. For Chang Po-hsing's deletion of Ch’eng I's saying from his commentary, see below, ch. 6, n. 21.

57. Ch. 6, sec. 5; ch. 9, sec. 14.

58. Ch. 9, secs. 12, 13, 18.

59. Ch. 7, secs. 33, 35; ch. 12, sec. 27.

60. Ch. 7, secs. 22, 38.

61. Ch. 2, sec. 40; ch. 7, sec. 26.

62. Ch. 7, secs. 3, 8, 12, 14, 21.

63. Ch. 8, sec. 2.

64. Ch. 8, sec. 16.

65. Ch. 8, sec. 25.

66. Ch. 9, secs. 1, 2, 5, 6.

67. Ch. 7, sec. 14; ch. 8, secs. 9, 14, 23; ch. 9, secs. 1, 3, 23, 26, 27.

68. This list appears in the beginning of the Chin-ssu lu but is omitted from the translation. For a detailed list of selections from these works, see below, “On the Chin-ssu lu and Its Commentaries,” pp. 330-35.

69. See below, p. 334.

70. Originally this was at the end of the T’ung-shu but Chu Hsi shifted it to the beginning. Now it is no longer part of the T’ung-shu but an independent work. It constitutes the first section of the Chin-ssu lu. For an English translation, see Wing-tsit Chan, A Source Book in Chinese Philosophy, pp. 463-64.

71. This short work in 40 chapters, each of which is only a paragraph, deals with various subjects. The book is so called because Chou Tun-i felt that its principles penetrate and are harmonious with those in the Chou-i (Book of Changes). For an English translation, see Chan, Source Book, ch. 28. See also French translation by Chow Yih-Ching, La Philosophie Morale dans le Neo-Confucianisme (Tcheou Touen-Yi).

72. This work consists of five chapters, including poems, memorials to the emperor, a letter, and some essays.

73. This work contains eight chapters. It is similar to the Ming-tao wen-chi, but is twice as long. For an English translation of several letters and essays by the Ch’engs, see Chan, Source Book, chs. 31-32.

74. The I-shu of the two Ch’engs is a collection of conversations recorded by their pupils. It has 25 chapters and a supplement. Chs. 1-10 are conversations of the two brothers, most of which are not identified with either master. Chs. 11-14 contain Ch’eng Hao's conversations; chs. 15-25, Ch’eng I's. There is a supplement, containing their biographies and similar materials. For English translations of selections from these conversations, see Chan, Source Book, chs. 31-32. Ts’ai Yung-ch’un has selected and translated many of Ch’eng I's sayings in his The Philosophy of Ch’eng I. Many of the two brothers' sayings are also translated in A. C. Graham, Two Chinese Philosophers: Ch’eng Ming-tao and Ch’eng I-ch’uan.

75. The Wai-shu of the two Ch’engs, in twelve short chapters, consists of additional sayings of the two brothers. In most cases the speaker is not identified, and many of the passages repeat ideas discussed in the I-shu.

76. This is Ch’eng I's commentary on the Book of Changes (Chou-i). It is a lengthy four-chapter work commenting on the texts and commentaries of the Book of Changes, often sentence by sentence.

77. This work by Ch’eng I is in eight chapters. Much of the work has been lost. For example, in ch. 6 it has comments on only nine of the 20 chapters of the Analects, and of ch. 7, the explanation of the Book of Mencius, nothing remains.

78. This work in 17 sections is Chang Tsai's most important work, setting forth his philosophy in short passages rather than lengthy treatises. English translations of chs. 1 and 6 are given in Chan, Source Book, ch. 30. For an incomplete French translation of the work, see Ch. de Harlez, “L’École philosophique moderne de la Chine ou Système de la Nature (Sing-li),” Mémoire de L’Académie Royale des Sciences des Lettres et des Beaux-Arts de Belgique, XLIX (1890), 36-76.

79. This is in three chapters. Some parts are missing.

80. The present work is not the original compilation but contains authentic sayings.

81. There is a separate Chang Tzu yü-lu (Recorded conversations of Master Chang), which contains more sayings, many of which duplicate those in the Chang Tzu ch’üan-shu. The Wen-chi is no longer extant, although excerpts from it are preserved in the Chang Tzu ch’üan-shu. The Li-yüeh shuo, Lun-yü shuo and Meng Tzu shuo are lost.

82. For statistics, see below, p. 331 ff.

83. I-shu, 3:2a.

84. Ibid., 2A:2b, 7:1a, 3:1b; Ts’ui-yen, 2:13b.

85. I-shu, 6:4a.

86. For further details of his life, see the Sung shih, 427:2b-5b, and Bruce, Chu Hsi and His Masters, pp. 18-24.

87. See below, ch. 14, sec. 16.

88. See below, ch. 14, sec. 26.

89. See below, ch. 14, sec. 17.

90. See below, ch. 14, sec. 21.

91. See below, ch. 14, sec. 23.

92. I-ch’uan wen-chi, 7:1a-7b. See also Sung shih, 247:5a-10a, and Bruce, Chu Hsi and His Masters, pp. 41-45.

93. See below, ch. 12, sec. 31.

94. For fuller accounts, see the Sung shih, 427:10a-15b; Yao Ming-ta, Ch’eng I-ch’uan nien-p’u; and Bruce, Chu Hsi and His Masters, pp. 45-47.

95. Wai-shu, 11:5b; 12:3b, 6b.

96. See below, ch. 14, sec. 22.

97. Chu Hsi, comp., I-Lo yüan-yüan lu, 4:15a.

98. For more details, see the Sung shih, 427:15a-17b; Chang Tzu ch’üan-shu, 15:10b-14a; and Bruce, Chu Hsi and His Masters, pp. 50-52.

99. See below, ch. 14, sec. 25.

100. See the Sung shih, 427:18b-21a; and Bruce, Chu Hsi and His Masters, pp. 31-35.

101. Except for a quotation from him by Ch’eng Hao in ch. 5, sec. 15.

102. See the Sung shih, 427:19a.

103. In ch. 2, sec. 3. In ch. 1, sec. 38, Chu Hsi omitted the phrase “That is, the so-called nature of principle,” probably a Buddhist term, originally. But this clearly repeats the idea of the opening sentence.

104. See below, ch. 7, sec. 13. See also Chu's commentary on ch. 4, sec. 6. For other instances of Ch’eng I’s alteration of the meanings of Confucian Classics, see below, ch. 1, secs. 14, 40; ch. 7, sec. 3.

105. See below, his comments on ch. 4, sec. 6, and also the Chu Tzu yü-lei, 73:15b.

106. See below, Chu Hsi's comment on ch. 12, sec. 14.

107. See below, comment on ch. 1, sec. 39. For other criticisms of Ch’eng I, see his comments on ch. 1, secs. 5, 10, 17, 21; ch. 10, sec. 31; ch. 11, sec. 15, etc. See also his comments on ch. 1, secs. 3, 20, 22, 23.

108. See below, tables, pp. 332-36.

109. See below, ch. 1, secs. 10, 12, 13, 15.

110. For lessons on the Mean, see below, ch. 3, sec. 53; ch. 5, sec. 6; ch. 6, sec. 4; ch. 7, secs. 11, 15, 19. For lessons on correctness, see below, ch. 6, sec. 8; ch. 7, secs. 3, 6, 12, 14, 21; ch. 12, secs. 7-9. For lessons on both the Mean and correctness, see below, ch. 5, secs. 7, 9; ch. 7, sec. 16; ch. 10, sec. 10; ch. 12, sec. 3.

111. Chu Tzu yü-lei, 67:6a, 8b; 117:7b-8b.

112. Ibid., 119:10a. For Lü Tsu-ch’ien's prodding him into using this book, see below, p. 325.

113. The most outstanding example of the Neo-Confucian collections is the Hsing-li ta-ch’üan (Great collection of Neo-Confucianism), comp. by Hu Kuang (1370-1418) and others. As the Ssu-k’u ch’üan-shu tsung-mu t’i-yao (p. 1918) has pointed out, the collection of the Neo-Confucian sayings in the Hsing-li ta-ch’üan is an enlargement of the Chin-ssu lu. The anthologies inspired by the Chin-ssu lu, which, with slight variations, have all followed its fourteen-chapter division, are: Liu Ch’ing-chih (Chu Hsi's pupil, 1139-95), comp., Chin-ssu hsü-lu (Supplement to the Reflections on Things at Hand), containing sayings of pupils of the Ch’eng brothers, an anthology of which Chu Hsi did not entirely approve because he thought the pupils did not match their masters (see Chu Tzu yü-lei, 101:1a); Ts’ai Mu (Chu Hsi's pupil, fl. 1220), comp., Chin-ssu hsü-lu (Supplement to the Reflections on Things at Hand); Kao P’an-lung (1562-1626), comp., Chu Tzu chieh-yao (The essentials of Master Chu's teachings); Liu Yüan-lu (1619-1700), comp., Chin-ssu hsü-lu (Supplement to the Reflections on Things at Hand); Chu Hsien-tsu (fl. 1684), comp., Chu Tzu chin-ssu lu (Master Chu's Reflections on Things at Hand); Chang Po-hsing (1651-1725), comp., Hsü chin-ssu lu (Supplement to the Reflections on Things at Hand); Chu Ch’üan (1702-59), comp., Hsia-hsüeh pien (Anthology on studying things on the lower level), all seven containing sayings by Chu Hsi; and Wang Yu (1827-60), comp., Wu-tzu chin-ssu lu (The reflections on things at hand of the five philosophers), which adds Chu Hsi's sayings to those of the Four Masters. Also Ts’ai Mu, comp., Chin-ssu pieh-lu (Separate records of reflections on things at hand), a collection of sayings by Lü Tsu-ch’ien and Chang Shih; Chiang Ch’i-p’eng (fl. 1604), comp., Chin-ssu pu-lu (The Reflections on Things at Hand supplemented), an anthology of Sung (960-1279) and Ming (1368-1644) Neo-Confucianists, including Chu Hsi; Chang Po-hsing, comp., Kuang chin-ssu lu (Further records of reflections on things at hand), containing sayings of Lü Tsu-ch’ien, Chu Hsi's pupil Huang Kan, and later Neo-Confucianists; Sun Ch’eng-tse (1592-1676), comp., Hsüeh-yüeh hsü-pien (Supplement to the Essentials of Learning), an anthology of four Ming Neo-Confucianists; Cheng Kuang-hsi (fl. 1700?), Hsü chin-ssu lu (Supplement to the Reflections on Things at Hand), a collection of sayings by Ming thinkers including Wang Yang-ming; and Chu Ch’üan, comp., Shu-ai lu (Records of self-cultivation and self-discipline), a selection of sayings from his teacher Chang Lü-hsing's (1611-74) Pi-wang lu (Records as a reminder).

114. For this commentary, see below, pp. 338-39.

115. See below, pp. 337-58, nos. 1-62, for Chinese, Korean, and Japanese commentaries and nos. 29-31, 33-35, 39-40, 49-50, and 52 for commentaries by the followers of Yamazaki.

116. “Circuits” of 11 prefectures in present Anhui and Kiangsi and of six prefectures in Chekiang, respectively.

117. See Wang Mou-hung, Chu Tzu nien p’u, pp. 109-15.

118. Modern Ch’ang-sha County, Hunan Province.

119. For this episode, see ibid., pp. 212-13, Sung shih, 429:17a, and Huang Kan's “Biographical Account” in his Huang Mien-chai chi, 8:27a-b.

120. Chu Tzu wen-chi, 11:1a-10a.

121. Ibid., 11:10a-16b.

122. Ibid., 11:17a-37b.

123. Ibid., 13:1a-6a. The audience took place in the capital Lin-an (modern Hangchow).

124. Ibid., 13:6a-20a. The audience took place in the capital.

125. Ibid., 14:1a-8b. The audience took place in the capital.

126. Notably professor designate of the military academy in 1163, compiler designate of the bureau of military affairs in 1169, librarian of the imperial library in 1176, a post in the imperial archives in 1181, judicial intendancy of Chiang-nan West in 1182, judicial intendancy in Kiangsi, and junior expositor in waiting in 1188, assistant regional governor (see below, ch. 10, n. 75.) of Chiang-nan East in 1189, assistant commissioner of Hunan in 1191, and pacification commissioner of Kwangsi in 1192. Once he declined a post seven times over a period of several years.

127. For this episode, see Huang Kan, Huang Mien-chai chi, 8:14b, and Wang Mou-hung, Chu Tzu nien-p’u, p. 143.

128. In 1158-79, 1183-89, and 1191-96, he was guardian of six different temples in various parts of China, holding nine different appointments.

129. See the Sung shih, 429:18b, and Wang Mou-hung, Chu Tzu nien-p’u, pp. 218-20.

130. According to Huang Kan, 8:29a-b, the year was 1209.

131. For Hui, see below, p. 2, n. 11. For fuller details on Chu Hsi's life, see the Sung shih, ch. 429; Wang Mou-hung, Chu Tzu nien-p’u; Bruce, Chu Hsi and His Masters, pp. 56-96; Conrad M. Schirokauer, “Chu Hsi's Political Career: A Study of Ambivalence,” in Wright and Twitchett, eds., Confucian Personalities, pp. 162-88, 353-59; Gotō Shunzui, Shushi, pp. 1-198.

132. Present Yeh County.

133. For fuller information on Lü, see the Sung shih, 434:2a-5a.

134. Chu Hsi's collection of sayings on daily conduct and human relations, and exemplary deeds of sages and worthies from ancient times to his own. For a French translation, see Chu Hsi, La Siao Hio ou morale de la jeunesse avec le commentaire de Tschen-siuen, tr. by Ch. de Harlez.

135. This and the following seven passages are from the Chu Tzu yü-lei, 105:4b-5a. For two additional passages from the same place, see below, “The Chin-ssu lu and Its Commentaries,” p. 324, n. 7.

136. See above, nn. 2, 4, 7, and 14.

137. Chu Hsi had several pupils by this name. There is no further identification.

138. Confucius, Mencius, Tzu-ssu (492-431 b.c.), and Tseng Tzu (505-c. 436 b.c.).

139. This is Lü Tsu-ch’ien's Preface.

140. Courtesy name of T’ung Po-yü, Chu Hsi's pupil.

141. Paraphrasing the I-shu, 18:5b.

142. Chu Tzu wen-chi, 59:12b.

143. Ibid., 64:37a. The list is that referred to above, n.72. For Chu Hsi's additional sayings exhorting people to read the Chin-ssu lu, see the Chu Tzu wen-chi, 46:29b and 63:19a; and for his intention to include certain sayings, see below, “On the Chin-ssu lu and Its Commentaries”, n. 7.

144. Chu Tzu wen-chi, 63:19a. For the “order” referred to, see below, ch. 3, secs. 70-78.