Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
kind but of the cosmos as well. What the sage is concerned about, Mou
points out, is not that myriads of things do not sprout and flourish, but
that they d o not each and all find their own proper niches in the sprouting
and n ~ u r i s h i n g . ~ ~Like the Buddhist great compassion, and the
Christian universal love, the Confucian sense of concernedness, saturated
with a pervasive pathos, is essentially a cosmic feeling.24
More important, the sense of concernedness implies or presumes a
profound sense of responsibility which in turn is typically moral in nature.
Therefore, the cosmic Sen= of concernedness also imbues both Heaven
and human nature with a pervasive moral significance that is unique to
Chinese philosophy. For this reason, Mou concludes, it is from youhuan
yishi that the major distinguishing feature of Confucianism ultimately
stems: its emphasis on subjectivity and morality, both of which reside
inside us and tend to work for immanentization. The Western tradition,
on the other hand, emphasizes objectivity and religiosity, both of which
stay outside or above us and tend t o work for transcendentization.
In addition, Mou argues that with the descending of Heavens
Mandate into human subjectivity, a process of depersonification of Heaven
occurs. This is inevitable, because, he says,
with Heavens morally creative power, this creativity, Mou stresses, still
appears obscure and abstract t o humans, because it has not been
intimately and vividly felt by humans themselves. Strictly speaking, it
has not found its way into the deep recess of humans heart-mind. In
other words, the transcendent is still not immanent enough: it is still
something hanging up half way in the air and remains aloof t o
humans. To make Heaven thoroughly immanentized, the creativity now
constituting the substance of human nature must be personally experi-
enced and existentially verified by humans themselves, by the individuals
heart-mir~d.~ If the first step of immanentization is for Heaven to
descend into human nature; the second step is for Heaven and human
nature to be entrenched in the individuals heart-mind. This momentous
step was first taken by Confucius and later developed by Mencius.
Mou believes there are two basic concepts [or sets of concepts] in
Confucius thinking: (1) humanity (ren) and ( 2 ) Heaven and nature (tian
and As mentioned earlier, the concepts of Heaven and nature
(xing) were much older than Confucius. It was part of a long, deep-
seated tradition in which Confucius was brought up. Confucius central
concern and greatest contribution, Mou contends, lay elsewhere: the
exploration of the vision based o n the concept of ren.
By way of ren, Mou emphasizes, Confucius opened up a new dimen-
sion of spiritual life-the vast realm of human subjectivity scarcely
explored before. However, given the tremendous role Heaven played in
Confucius time and judging from what he said about Heaven in the
Analects, it is reasonable to assume that while he was exploring the
meaning o f ren, he had a strong, deep-rooted, though seldom discussed,
yearning for transcendence. Heaven formed the backdrop that loomed
large in his exploration of the vision of ren Confucius, Mou argues,
is indeed using ren t o achieve spiritual communication with Heaven.l
Mou characterizes Confucius ren b y quoting the Book ofChunge:
Ren takes the pervading of sensibility as its nature and the soothing of
things its function He sees ren as the ceaseless expansion of ones com-
passion and pathos until it pervades the myriads of things in the universe;
410 LIN TONGQI AND ZHOU QIN
and in the course of the expansion ren brings warmth and life to myriads
of things, producing an &-embracing nourishing and soothing effect.
Like tian, ren is self-generating and does not depend upon anything else
for its continues expansion and development. This is why Mou also
characterized ren as creativity itself, a moral creativity that soothes
myriads of things.33 The intentional meaning of ren, Mout argues, is
thus the same as that of Heaven. Although Confucius seldom talked about
Heaven and hujan nature, they are implied in ren, because, by making
Heavens import concrete, clear and down-to-earth to the individual, ren
is a personal verification of the existence of Heavens Way in ones
nature. y,
Confucius ren was later developed by Mencius into his famous
four beginnings, or original heart-mind (benxin). An analysis of the
four beginnings shows that this original heart-mind, Mou maintains, is
moral in nature and therefore is a moral mind, or moral conscioua-
ne~s.~ Both concepts of moral good itself and that of moralit!y
itself acquire their intentional meanings directly from the lived-
experience of the operation of the active and activating moral mind.
Indeed, to be truly autonomous and self-sufficient, morality must not be
established from without. It must be established from within, i.e. by
resorting to the innate moral consciousness Without moral conscious-
ness, the moral implications of the Heavenly-endowed creativity in human
nature would remain obscure, empty, and even irrelevant to humans.
Even God as the Highest Good, Mou contends, must be verified subjective-
ly by humans moral consciousness before becoming relevant to them.
In Mods eyes, the crucial import of Mencius theory of human
nature being good is to confirm, or rather to make explicit, in a
subjective way the morality and moral good that are humans true nature.
If Zhongyong and Yizhum specify human nature from an objective
cosmological approach, Mencius specifies it from a subjective moral
approach. By way of the former Heaven descends into human nature;
by way of the latter, both Heaven and human nature find its sensorium
right down in the human heart-mind. The concept of Xing, verified by
MOU ZONGSAN 41 1
xin, was for the first time firmly and formally established in the Con-
fucian tradition. The oneness of xin and Xing was once for all established
without doubt. This, Mou believes, was the major achievement of
M e n ~ i u: s~~
However, Mou maintains that although Mencius successfully estab-
lished the oneness of xin and Xing, his wording seems to suggest that
there is still a small gap between Heaven on the one hand and xin and Xing
on the other.37. In other words, the trinity of xin, Xing, and rim3,
a more elaborate expression for riunren heyi is not fully established by
either Confucius or Mencius, although it is, according to Mou, definitely
implied by both. To that degree, the process of the immanentization of
transcendence is not yet completely realized. It was up to the Neo-
Confucians of the Ming-Qing period, or rather their authentic line,
Mou maintains3, to fulfill the mission.
Mou believes that the major theme for the Neo-Confucians is
to inter-penetrate the Analects, the Mencius, Zhongyong, and Yizhuun
and make them one, by which Mou essentially means the inter-penetra-
tion of Heaven, human nature, and heart-mind, the trinity of riun, Xing,
and in.^' This integrative effort is best illustrated by Cheng Haos
thinking. Cheng (1032-1085)was considered by Mou as the Neo-Confu-
cian thinker who forged the paradigm of Confucian Perfect Teaching
(yuanjiao), the paradigm of interpenetrating and making [all the mani-
festations of Tao] into one (tong er yi hi).''^^ Cheng is known for his
saying Tao is the one root, by which he means Tao is the one root
with different manifestations. The one root refers to the ontocos-
mological reality that is moral creativity or cosmic creative transformation
itself. It is called by different names in different realms:
In short, it is Heaven when vieewed objectively and in totality and xin and
Xing when viewed subjectively and individually. The trinity of heart-
mind, nature and Heaven (xin, Xing, and r i m ) is thus fully achieved and
the immanentization of the transcendent eventually realized.
ones own life the substance of xin and Xing. 43 In Confucian tradition
the gist of gongfu is best represented by Mencius famous formulation:
He who fully realizes his heart-mind (xin) knows his nature (Xing). He
who knows his true nature (Xing) knows Heaven (tian). This formula-
tion, starting from human heart-mind through human nature upward to
Heaven, seems to show that gongfir is in effect the very same process of
the verification of tian and Xing by xin, as mentioned earlier in this
article. Paradoxically enough, the verification process, which is then
visualized as part of the effort to pull Heaven downward, as it were, and
make it closer to humans heart-mind, namely the immanentization
process, now turns out to be only the same process of gongfu, which is
visualized as an effort to lift humans heart-mind upward and makes it
closer to Heaven, namely the transendentalization process.
The paradox, however, is solved in the eyes of some Neo-Confucians,
because they contend that gongfir (moral practice) is benti (ontological
reality) and benti gongfu. In other words, the process of human moral
practice is essentially the very same process of cosno-ontological creative
transformation, and vice versa. The two processes always go hand in
hand, because they are, according to Mou, the same process of moral
creation, but manifest themselves respectively in the subjective realm of
the individuals inner life and the objective realm of myriads of things.
This, indeed, is the very essence of the principle of the trinity of tian,
Xing, xin mentioned above.
Our anaiysis seems to show that ~0;s anthropocosnic vision is
not a static state of mind in which transcendence is embedded in imman-
ence, nor a simple balance or identifkation of immanence and transcend-
ence. It can perhaps be best visualized as a mutually intertwined, dynamic
two-way traffic: the immanentization process that goes from tion down-
ward through Xing to xin and the transcendentization process that goes
from xin through Xing to tian The two processes occur simultaneously
and both culminate in the trinity of tian, xmg, xin. This trinity,
even if seen as the culmination of the two dynamic processes, is bound
to be also dynamic and fluid. It is, indeed, packed with mutual interac-
414 L I N TONGQI AND ZHOU QIN
What Mou appreciates most in Lius remark is what he calls the spirit of
416 LIN TONCQI AND ZHOU QIN
tightly mutual drawing and sucking between the above and the
be lo^,"^' which unmistakably captures a vision that is thoroughly
dynamic. It is in the dynamism intrinsic to the concept of rongerweiyi
that the anthropocosmic tension we are going to discuss, i.e., the
tension between Heaven and humans, is hidden. An important clue to
the existence of the hidden tension is Mous repeated assertion of the
indispensable presence of Heaven in his anthropocosmic vision.
Way from afar. This communion, according to Mou, takes two forms:
transcendent and immanent. The transcendent form is developed by
Confucius in the Analects Mou argues that, for Confucius, Heaven,
comparatively speaking, had the flavor of a religious personal God.
Instead of pulling Heaven down, Mou says, Confucius pushed it a bit
away.56 While Confucius was practicing his ren, Mou adds, the
Heaven he communicates with had a dual meaning: In principle it was a
metaphysical reality; but in his feelings it was a personal God. When
Confucius knows Heaven, as the master once claimed, through practi-
cing ren. Heaven also responds by knowing him. Only Heaven knows
me! Confucius once exclaimed. A kind of tacit mutual understanding
resulted between the two, which Tu Wei-ming expands into what he calls
a faithful dialogical response to the transcendent.* If Heaven can be
seen as conducting a dialogue with humans,- the gap between the two
seems to be implied and Heaven as a quasi-personal God far above can not
but inspire a profound sense of awe in C o n f u ~ i u s ~ ~
The immanent form of communion is developed later mainly in
Zhongyong. Instead of pushing Heaven a bit away as Confucius did,
Mou says, Zhongyong draws Heaven into oneself, turning it into ones
nature and at the same time transforming it into a metaphysical reality.
According to Zhongyong, Mou argues, the sage at his most sincere
moment merges completely with Heaven, leaving n o gap between the
One problem naturally arises: how does Mou define the relationship
between the two forms of communion? Are they contradictory and in-
compatible? Mous answer is no. He maintains that, bot!! historically
and philosophically, the transition from the transcendent form to the
immanent one is a natural course of event and a big development.
This assertion seems to imply that the immanent form is the more deve-
loped or advanced form and hence the one to be preferred. However,
a deeper probe into his position shows that what he tries to drive home is
not the priority of one form over the other but what he calls a real
unification of the principle of subjectivity and the principle of
418 LIN TONGQI AND ZHOU Q I N
objec tivity.I6
By the principle of subjectivity Mou refers to the approach that
takes as its point of departure the subjectivity of ones spiritual life, which
includes ren, cheng (sincerity), and x i n By the. principle of objectivity
he refers to the approach that takes as its point of departure the objecti-
vity of the metaphysical reality. The relationship between the two
principles is essentially that between immanence and transcendence.
It is interesting to note that Mou uses the Hegelian categories of
thesis, antithesis and synthesis t o illustrate the relationship. Hegel
explains the Christian trinity in terms of three stages: (1) God-in-Himself,
i e . Holy Father as the embodiment of the principle of objectivity exists,
or rather subsists, in Himself, ( 2 ) God-for-Himself, i.e. Holy Son as the
embodiment of the principle of subjectivity serves as the vehicle through
which Holy Father manifests Himself, and (3) 6d-in-and-for-Himself,i.e.
Holy Spirit is finally established as the unrfication of Holy Faiher and
Holy Son, of objectivity and subjectivity.
Mou explains the Confucian paradigm of perfect teaching forged
by Cheng Hao, or the Confucian trinity as we call it, along essentially
the same line of reasoning: (1) Heaven as the embodiment of the principle
of objectivity exists (or rather subsists) in itself and hence is Heavens
Way-in-itself, ( 2 ) Ren or xin as the subjective vehicle through which
Heavens Way manifests itself is Heavens Way-for-itself, and (3) The sage,
hke Confucius, who in the course of practicing ren verifies the objective
intentional meaning of Heavens Way through subjective inner experi-
ence, can be seen as the unlfication of subjectivity and objectivity, and
hence, in this sense, is Heavens Way-in-and-for-itself.6z
Leaving the intricacies of Hegelian terminology aside, what Mou
tries to convey here is a dynamic, dialectical vision in which in spite Gf the
final synthesis or fusion, Heavens ever presence is persistently under-
lined. This is made even clearer if we review briefly Mous interpretation
and evaluation of the major strands or models in Confucian tradition in
China.
MOU ZONGSAN 419
Mou observes.66
Confucius and Mencius, however, did not fully elaborate on the
principle of objectivity. It was up to Zhongyong and Yizhuan t o d o the
job, namely, to start from above and explain Xing objectively, trans-
cendentally from an onto-cosmological ~tand-point.~This development,
Mou stresses, is both crucial and inevitable. It is crucial because by doing
so Heaven is duly and definitely included and absorbed in the inodel:
ture and lets the subject penetrate into the object and absorb the object
into the ~ubject.~ Nevertheless, his ultimate goal is not merely the
exaltation of subjectivity as such but the unification of subjectivity and
objectivity. Indeed, he even sees the historical development of Chinese
Confucianism in terms of the balancing of the two principles: from the
preConfucius ancient tradition to Confucius and Mencius, to Zhongyong
and Yizhuan and later Cheng-Zhu, and then to Lu-Wang, the pendulum
seemed to swing back and forth between objectivity and subjectivity until
the emergence of Cheng Haos perfect teaching model, which was later
inherited and developed by the Hu-Liu line. It seems reasonable to
assume that in the dynamic, dialectical unification process of Heaven and
humans, Heaven as the embodiment of the principle of objectivity, while
gradually and largely retreating to the background, never loses its uplifting
and inspiring effect. It lurks behind and exudes a transcendental
affmity for the myriads of thmgs, carrying and moving forward with them
in an extremely profound way.m
One question, however, naturally arises: If the ever presence of
Heaven is assumed, how can we account for the trinity of Heaven, Xing,
and xin Mou reiterates? Why does the oneness of tian, Xing, xin not
necessarily imply the dissolution of Heaven in the trinity, and hence
its absence from his anthropocosmic vision? This question brings us to
Mous theory of the double meaning of Heaven, human nature, and
ming (order or fate), a point that Mou stresses from time to time but is
often unduly neglected by some of his readers.
when Mencius says fully realize ones heart-mind (xin) and know human
nature (Xing) so as to know Heaven, Heaven, along with xin and Xing,
is understood essentially in terms of li. It refers to the ultimate metaphysi-
cal reality and is used in its positive sense. In this context, Mou asserts,
tian, Xing, and xin can be one. But when Mencius says conserve ones
heart-mind and nurture ones true nature so as to serve Heaven, he is
talking about humans as actually existing beings and Heaven also as qi-
bearing and -imbuing. In this case, Mou maintains, xin and Xing,
because of [the incongruity between] the limitations of actually existing
beings on the one hand and the pervasive extension of qi on the other, can
not be one with Heaven.79
nothing but the trace of 113 own activity. [What li does] , Mou says,
is, in the last analysis, creative generation that helps myriads of things
fuLfX themselves. It is creative generation that fulfds, or fulfilling
function that creatively generate. Apart from fulfilling creativity there
would be no creativity at all, Mou asserts.83 What Mous theory of
fulfilling creativity highlights is the integration of li and q i or the
oneness of substance(t0 and function boung), with li serving as the
original substance that plays the positive and generating role and qi as
the trace of its activity. Strictly speaking, it is on the basis of this
theory that the ever presence of Heaven in his anthropocosmic vision is
justified.
Heaven, as the metaphysical reality consisting of li and qi, possesses
a double meaning or a dual dimensionality. Sometimes, it discloses more
of its li dimension, in which case, Heaven, once merging withxin andxing,
becomes fully immanentized. Sometimes, it discloses more of its q i
dimension. Then, Heaven, incapable of being totally immanentized,
remains transcendent. Since the two dimensions, according to Mou,
inter-penetrate each other and are actually one (or symbiotic, t o borrow
a term from David Hall and Roger Ames), Heaven could in n o circum-
stances be expelled from Mous anthropcosmic vision without rendering it
totally distorted. This point will become even clearer if we examine
further the double meaning of ming and Xing.
So far in this article ming and Xing are used in the sense typically
exemplified in the opening sentence of Zhongyong: What Heaven man-
dates (ming) is nature (Xing). Both xmg and ming are understood here in
terms of li They are what Mou respectively calls li-Xing (Xing linking t o li)
and li-ming (ming linking t o li). This usage of xmg and ming is typical
of the mainstream of Confucian moral idealism. But when Xing and ming
land themselves on q i Mou says, xing becomes qi-Xing (Xing linking t o
Confucianism does not start from God and say Gods intention
is so and so. It starts from how to realize Gods intention or
Heavens Way. This is what we mean when we talk about
emphasizing subjectivity. Once the gate of subjectivity is
opened, the above [or the transcendent] and the below
[or the immanent] can interpenetrate each other, which is
what we mean by the inter-penetration of subjectivity and
objectivity with moral practice as its center ... The objective
God and the subjective feelings of calling for Heavens help
are thus completely absorbed in and subsumed by how to
realize Heavens Way and hidden in the infinite process of
MOU ZONCSAN 42 9
moral fulfilment.%
The message seems obvious: We are fated, and yet we shall forge
on. The question, however, persists: Is the message optimistic or pessi-
mistic? The key note it strikes seems to be self-reliant and optimistic.
Yet, when Confucius says, Do it even if you know it is impossible to
accomplish, a tragic note threatens to emerge visibly. If we read it in
connection with the masters cherished disciple Zeng Zis saying about
taking ren as ones burden and carrying it until one dies,1 the hidden
tragic sense is unmistakable indeed: you are doomed to commit your-
self to a fruitless effort endlessly until your death.
In fact, Li Zehou, perhaps the most original thinker in China main-
land, reads even a Sisyphean sense of tragedy into this famous saying of
Confucius when he comments on the well-known Chinese writer Lu Xun
(1 88 1-1 936). Li highly praises the metaphysically flavored solitariness
and pathos that accompanied Lu Xun until h i death. Camus Sisyphus
432 LIN TONGQI AND ZHOU QIN
Mou traces the source of Confucian tragic sense again to the indis-
pensabl role of qi in his anthropocosrnic vision. Speaking of the positive
and negative function of qi, he says:
This remarkable remark by Mou provides much food for thinking for
comparative philosophers and theologians It leads us one step further
and engages us in philosophical reflection that touches upon a realm that
is shared by all great spiritual traditions. If Tianren heyi in this context
can be visualized as tranquil, harmonious, blissful, tensionless, it can also
be seen as dynamic, awe-inspiring, tragic and full of commotions. In fact,
434 LIN TONG01 AND ZHOU QIN
NOTES
5 1. XKX,395.
52. Tu Wei-ming makes a similar but very apt observation when he interpreted
rionten heyi as [We need] both to transcend [this world] and t o dive deep
into it. A tension is involved and the intexaction is continuous See Tu,
Rujia chuantong de xiandai zhuanhua (The modern transformation of Con-
fucian tradition) (Beijing: Zhongguo guanbo dianshi chubanshe, 1992), 21 3.
5 3. ZZDT, 20.
5 4. Tu, Rujia chuantong de xiandai zhuanhua, 2 12-13.
55. ZZDT, 27.
56. ZZDT, 34.
57. ZZDT, 35.
58. Tu Wei-ming, Centrality and Commonality. 94.
59. Whether there is a sense of awe in C o n f u c i a n h is a controversial issue. Cheng
Chung-ying, for example, excludes awe from the Confucian sense of the
numinous Instead of awe, he says, there is calm and clarity. See,
Cheng, New Dimensions in Confucianism and Neo-Confucianism, 415.
60. ZZDT, 35.
61. See ZZDT, 40-51.
62. ZZDT, 40-5 1.
63. Model is used here in a loose sense to denote the gist characteristic of a
teaching.
64. XYX,21.
65. XYX,26.
66. XYX 26.
61. XYX,31.
68. XYX,48.
69. XKX,35.
70. ZZDT, 58.
71. XYX,49.
72. XYX 48.
73. XYX 413.
74. XYX,48.
75. XYX,48.
76. Mou Zongsan, Zhexue shqiu jiang (Nineteen lectures o n philosophy) (Taipei:
xuesheng shuju, 19831, 79.
17. See ZZDT, 49;XYX,346-1.
78. XYX, 22. Mods remark is intended for Confucius But he makes clear in the
same page that the depersonification of r i m later does not affect the salient
438 LIN TONGQI AND ZHOU OIN
CHINESE GLOSSARY