Friday was both hot and humid. Yet despite the sweat sticking stubbornly to my forehead, I went to the HKSHP talk that night. It was a talk by Dr. Chan Chi Kwan ( 陳志鈞), a retired professor of the College of Education. It was on a topic which interests me. The topic was the concepts of right and wrong in Confucianism and Taoism.
According to Dr. Chan, to understand the details of a particular philosophy, it is necessary to tease out what its core concepts are and what they are not. Once this problem has been solved, a mass of apparently confusing details will fall naturally into place as merely different manifestations of the basic ideas in different contexts. To him, the core concept of Confucianim is the idea of Benevolence (仁) and the core concept of Taoism is of course the Tao (道). But the core concept of Tao is equally applicable to Confucianism, not just to Taoism only that in the case of Confucianism, the Tao has a slightly different emphasis. In fact, according to him, the core concepts of all religions bear remarkable similarities. There is something in what he said.
What is Tao? To Dr. Chan, Tao(道) is simply the Way. The highest Tao belongs to that relating to the universe ( 天道 ). When applied to its manifestation on the Earth (地) and to human society (人), it takes on a slightly different emphasis. To understand the Tao as a principle, we need to go back to the I-Ching (易經) which states that the basic principle of the universe is Yin and Yang (陰陽), whilst that of the Earthly Tao (地道) is softness and hardness (柔剛) and that of Man (人道) is Benevolence and Justice (仁義) with the first of each pair being the more internal and more fundamental than the other.
To Dr. Chan, Confucius and Mencius had slightly different emphasis of the Human Tao.(人道). To Confucius, Benevolence( 仁) is love (愛), self control and courtesy (克已復禮) whilst for Mencius it is Compassion/Sympathy/Empathy(惻隱之心), a sense of shame (差惡之心), a sense of tolerance (辭讓之心) and a sense of right and wrong (是非之心). To Mencius, Benevolence arises from Compassion(惻隱之心, 仁之端也) justice arises from a sense of shame ( 羞惡之心, 義之端也) and courtesy arises from a sense of tolerance (辭讓之心, 禮之端也) and wisdom arises from a sense of right and wrong (是非之心, 智之端也). These four senses can be likened to the 4 limbs of a person (人之有是四端, 猶其有四體也) [.孟子公孫丑上] Whilst benevolence is a matter of mind/heart (心), justice is a matter of conduct (行) and practice (功夫). Everything boils down to the aim or purpose of having a clear or easy or light conscience (放心). Knowledge is a matter of knowing how to have a clear/easy/light/relaxed conscience (學問之道無他, 求其放心而已矣) [孟子告子上]. If we concentrate first on what is important or the core before the details, we may understand everything, but not if we do so in reverse order (本末倒置). To Mencius, we are born with a sense of benevolence, justice, courtesy and wisdom, the latter not just being something which shines upon us from the outside( 仁義禮智, 非鑠於我也, 我固有之也 )[孟子告子下]. If we examine our heart/mind closely, we shall discover our nature and if we know our nature, we would know the guideline of the universe.(盡其心者, 知其性也; 知其性, 則知天矣) [孟子告子下] To Confucius, the ideal man concerns himself with/understands or will listen to justice whilst the ordinary person is touched only by profit (君子喻於義, 小人喻於利)[論語: 裡仁] and in case of conflict between life and justice, justice should prevail.(ニ者不可得兼,舍身而取義者也) [孟子告子下]. To Luk Yau(陸游), the ideal man bases his reputation on his sense of justice and his shame upon on its lack.(君子以義為貨.. .由義為榮, 背義為辱) Whether he got formal recognition in state exams and whether he obtained official positions in the government are matters of little consequences.(科甲名位, 何加損於我, 豈足言哉) (陸九淵與敦邦逸). Therefore, the highest ideal of the ideal man is to give up his life for benevolence and justice (殺身成仁. 舍身取義)
As far as practice is concerned, the highest Confucian principles are those of forgiveness/largess( 恕) ie. never do under unto others what we would not others do unto us (已所不欲, 勿施於人)[衛靈公]; of benevolence or love (仁); of wisdom or understanding others (智) and to help others as we help ourselves, to help others achieve what we ourselves wish to achieve (已欲立而立人, 已欲達而達人[論語, 雍也]. Mencius posits three stages in development toward the attainment of one's ideal in the order " to understand, to practice and not to be tempted"(知言, 養氣, 不動心). But all practices start from understanding ourselves, from achieving control of ourselves: trying to observe and discover the principles of how things work ( 格物致知)with honesty (誠意) and right kind of attitude(正心) and progresses from self-control to management of our family and then our nation and then the entire world(修身, 齊家, 冶國. 平天下) . Another technique/way is to forget ourselves (忘我) and start to work from ourselves outward, (推已及人) to always remember our nature, our origin, our initial aim (返本) (君子務本), then put into practice what we have learned (致用) and to internalize rules of courtesy to attain virtue(成德) But our foci should also vary with the passage of our life: when we are young, we should control our lust (少年戒色), when we are mature we should control our aggression(壯年戒鬥), , and when are old, we should control our desire for acheivement or holding on to possessions (老年戒得) Confucius said that he devoted himself to studies at 15, established himself at 30, achieved resistance to temptation at 40, knew his fate at 50 and attained the ability to accept others at 60 and the ability to follow his wishes at 70 without breaching the relevant rules. (十五志於學, 三十而立, 四十而不惑, 五十而知天命, 六十而耳順, 七十而從心所欲, 不逾矩) [論語, 為政第二] Presumably, he would think that we could model ourselves upon him!
Dr. Chan says that personally, he is more inclined towards the idea of Taoism as being deeper and more inclusive. That's hardly surprrising. Which thinking Chinese isn't? The starting point is Tao (道) but Tao is invisible and unspeakable (道可道, 非常道) and when the Tao operates in life, it starts with a unity (道生一) and then breaks into two (一生ニ), the negative and the positive(陰陽), two gives birth to three, an additional life, and three gives birth to everything else (三生萬物) (Cap 25 LaoTzu (LT) ) but everything starts with the negative before it turns to the positive but once they mix and merge with each other, they produce harmony.(萬物負陰而抱陽, 冲氣以為和) (cap 25 LT). To know is to know that harmony is the rule (知和曰常) and to always return to the point of origin (復命曰常 (cap 16 LT) It is found that everything always returns to its opposite and its roots, its origin in cycles, that going back to the roots means to return to the condition of silence, returning to the source of life from which we can discover the law of life. To understand this is to be enlightened .(夫物芸芸, 各復歸其根, 歸根曰靜, 靜曰復命, 復命曰常,知常曰明). To Laotzu, the Tao constantly works in cylces, always works to return to its origin and the origin is always silence, lack of motion, emptiness, nothingness (致虛極, 守靜篤). (cap 16 LT). If we know the way of the Tao, we will be more tolerant, more fair, more just, more whole, more conforming to the way of the universe, the way of the Tao/the Way. Therefore, if we follow the Way, we will survive longer without danger. (容乃公, 公乃全, 全乃天, 天乃道, 道乃久, 沒身不殆)(Cap 16 LT) The Tao existed before the birth of the universe, creating itself from a state of confusion, from chaos. It is silent, invisible, without form. It is independent, self-created, self-running, unalterable, goes round ceaselessly in circles. It can be treated as the mother/creator of heaven and earth. Its name is unknown and may be called the Tao. The Tao may reluctantly be called great. it runs far, and returns upon itself. Man fashions himself after the earth, the earth fashions itself after the heavens, and the heavens fashion themselves upon the Tao and the Tao fashions itself after Nature. And if we follow the Way, we may be as great as Nature. (有物混成, 先天地生,寂兮寥兮, 獨立而不改, 周行而不殆.可以為天下母, 吾不知其名, 字之日道.强為之名曰大. 大曰逝, 逝曰遠, 遠曰反。故道大, 天大, 地大, 人亦大..人法地, 地法天, 天法道, 道法自然) (cap 25 LT).
To Dr. Chan, the whole point of Laotzu's philosophy is to discover some laws which operate universally, which reach to the furthermost root or bottom of the universe, some rules or laws or other principles which operate always, forever (深根固抵, 長生久視之道). To him the way to deal with people and to serve heaven is to economise, to use the least, the minimum and not to waste. (人事天, 莫若嗇) The reason for this is that only then will we be conforming early to the way of the Tao (夫唯嗇, 是以早服), to emphasize on building up good works. If we build up good works, there is nothing we cannot overcome. (早服謂之重積德, 重積德則無不克。) If we can overcome everything, then we would be placed into a state where there is little limit of what we can do and if so, we may use this to rule a nation (無不克則莫知其極, 莫知其極, 可以有國). (Cap 59 LT) Like the Buddhist, Laotzu advocates not pushing thing, not getting attached to things because the more we push, the more we will meet with resitance and will fail and the more attached to an idea we become, the more we will meet with failure. Therefore the wise man will do little and will get attached to little (是以聖人無為故無敗, 無執故無失) and will seldom desire what the others desire, treasure what is scarce and will work to assist the others to go their own way and not dare to act positively on his own. ( 是以聖人欲不欲, 不貴難得之貨...以輔萬物之自然而不敢為). Laotzu advises us to always take the low, the smallpositions, to always go down, to adapt to the environment, like water i.e. to do good( 善). The exemplar of the best kind of good is water. By learning how water behaves, we know how to behave. He says that the water works to benefit others, not fight with them. Like water, we should place ourselves at the lowest, assume the shape of our environment containing us, the kind of positions shunned by the others, and go down as deeply as we can so as to avoid conflicting with others. (上善若水, 水利萬物而不爭, 處眾人之所惡, 故幾於道.) He thinks that we should keep our heart low and deep, be generous when we give, be honest when we talk, adjust others with order and work with actual ability and do what we can and choose well the best time to act. ( 心善淵, 與善仁, 言善信, 正善治, 事善能, 動善時) (cap 8 LT) He urges us to adopt the soft approach and move silently, without too much noise, too many words. Only then will we be able to roam the universe and move over the toughest terrain and enter its tiniest crevices and likewise when we teach, we teach by our examples not by our words and we then benefit the others by not doing. If so, there will be few who can match us. (天下之至柔, 馳騁天下之至堅, 無有入無間...不言之教, 無為之益, 天下希及之).. The key to Laotzu's thought about application of the Tao is the word "Return/Restoration" (反) which has two meanings, to return to the origin and to reverse position or direction. (反者道之動, 弱者道之用) (cap 40 LT) He urges us to start working where nothing has been yet been done, taste where there is little taste, tackle the difficult by starting with those parts of it which can easily be dealt with, to start with the small detail and what is easiest. (為無為, 事無事, 味無味. 圖難於其易, 為大於其細.). To him LaoTzu teaches us the following stragegy: to go in the opposite direction, to start before something begins, never to place oneself at a place where one cannot go anywhere and to move according to the circusmtances of time, place and people. (以反為用, 謀於未兆, 不蹈死地, 因勢而動)
To Dr. Chan, we may undersand ChuangTsu's philosophy through understanding three concepts : the True (真), the Transformaion (化) and Forgetfulness (忘). Whilst Laotzu is more objective. Chuangtze is more subjective. To him, you first need to have a man who know the truth.(先有真人而後有真知) (大宗師). It is not sufficient to have knowledge of the truth, we must live it. Transformation (化) means to overcome our limitation i e. our body, the boundary between self and the world and the self and other selves. We must transcend the material and enter the realm of the spiritual and we must forget words, forget our body, forget benevolence and justice, forget about the code of courtesy and the code of music, forget life and death, forget about the universe a(忘言, 忘身, 忘仁義, 忘禮樂, 忘生死, 忘天下,) and like Pao Ting (庖丁) and transcend the boundaries of the senses (官知止而神欲行).
Whatever Dr Chan may have taught us during the talk, I don't think that he has addressed the problem of what is right and what is wrong in the moral context. All he appeared to have done is to introduce to us a few key concepts relating to what the Confucianists and what the Taoists regard as important. Neither has he placed the thoughts of Confucius, Mencius, Laotzu and ChuangTzu into the kind of philosophical framework the modern man is accustomed to ie. the polarities of subjective/objective, self /the world, the genetical/the cultural, the physical /the psychological, reason/ emotions, the political relationship between man and society etc. In particular, it appears to me that he has failed to place the thoughts of the various philosophers in the contexts of contemporary moral theory of what is right and what is wrong. I suppose that he may say that we may derive our ideas of what is right and what is wrong in particular contexts from the basic or core principles that he elaborated for us ie. what is right is what conforms to the way of the Tao and what is wrong is to do the contrary. Perhaps he has taught us by not teaching us! To me, the great religions have all taught the same basic principles which could form the basis of what is right and what is wrong. The Christian will say that the greatest principle is the principle of love taught by Jesus: that we should do unto others what we would that others do unto us but they would say that the reason why we should do that is that that is the will of the creator of the universe and that it is his will that we should follow this principle of love. The Buddhists would say that the way to the elimination of suffering, the way to the interruption of the endless cycles of the reincarnation into various forms of life ie.the attainment of buddhahood ( attaining nirvana) is to realize and to put into practice the insight that ultimately what we see, hear, taste, smell, touch, feel, think are merely forms shaped by chance and the accidental co-origination of different causes with no permanent or eternal reality in any of them and that what is right is to follow such the insights provided by this realization. The Confucianists would argue that what is right is to follow our human nature at the core of which is the principle of compassion/sympathy/empathy for other human beings in a hiearchical order stretching from the humblest citizen to the Emperor/ruler. What the Taoist would argue is that we should follow the way of the Tao ie. to do what is natural and avoid what is not natural!
HAPPY FATHER's DAY!
回覆刪除It's the first time that I read your article with so many chinese characters in it. I guess your Chinese writing would be as good as your English writing. The difference between right and wrong could depend upon how humans draw the division line which parts the so-called right/good from the so-called wrong/evil. What interests me is the GREY ZONE rather than the White Zone/right or the Black Zone/wrong? It's always the GREY ZONE which is the most difficult one for us to make a judgement, to say whether something is right or wrong!
[版主回覆06/20/2010 17:56:00] believe that you too, are a father, the loving father of a beautiful 15-year-old who wouldn't stop her from following her dream to be an artist, if she wants to, like his father, whether or not she'd be able to make a living of it. Happy Father's Day to you too. I can only crawl or at best hobble along in Chinese, unlike you, Peter, 三枝筆, 迅雨, 葉子, 舸兒 (in no particular order or merit of course) etc. who can produce elegant poems close to the speed of light. How I envy you as Salieri envied Mozart! To me, there are no grey zones, only zones where there is black within white and white within black. The questions are the relative sizes of the white and black and whether the black can and if so and when and how it may grow within the white and vice versa. The respective areas of white and black are constantly shifting within either the sphere of what is considered right and what is considered wrong. Nothing is static. Nothing has ever been static for long. In most cases, it is impossible to draw the line as clearly as so many religious people would have us believe. But to me, no matter what, all the great religious/moral traditions share certain common values i.e. the value of life, the need to think not just of ourselves, but also of others and of the other beings in this world. To me, the greatest principle must always be the principle of no harm but more positively, we should do what we would have others do to us. If we do that, we cannot go far wrong. The basis of doing what is right and of avoiding what is wrong all boils down to one word: love: love of ourselves, love of others and love of both or all. The different religion/moral tradition differ only on the basis why what they advocated should be done!
We should do unto others what we would that others do unto us. Or more practically, do NOT do unto others what we would that others NOT do unto us ( 已所不欲 , 勿施於人 ).
回覆刪除Of the recorded dialogues between Confucius and his followers, I find one most interesting:
< 論語 - 陽貨>宰我問:「三年之喪,期已久矣 (one year is long enough) 。君子三年不為禮,禮必壞;三年不為樂,樂必崩。舊穀既沒,新穀既升,鑽燧改火,期可已矣。」 (Three years’ of inactivity would
子曰:「食夫稻,衣夫錦,於女安乎?」 (do you feel at ease feasting and wearing fine clothes during the mourning period?).
曰:「安。」 (yes, I feel at ease)
「女安則為之!夫君子之居喪,食旨不甘,聞樂不樂,居處不安,故不為也。今女安,則為之!」宰我出。子曰:「予之不仁也!子生三年,然後免於父母之懷。夫三年之喪,天下之通喪也。予也有三年之愛於其父母乎?」
Forget about who’s right and who’s wrong between Confucius and 宰我 . We have to see the issue in the time of Confucius when the observance of the “three-year” mourning ritual was considered the norm of filial piety. But from a practical point of view 宰我 had a valid point too. Confucius was NOT unaware of this but as a upholder of high moral, he could not change the norm. Under normal circumstances, Confucius would have dogmatically said: “No way, you have to observe this ritual.” Instead Confucius did not give any answer in black and white but he said: “Do it if it puts your mind at ease.” It seems that this was the only occasion when Confucius sounded evasive. Some critics said Confucius was bitter, suggesting that 宰我 was incorrigible so he gave up on him. Others were of the opinion that even the great master was in a dilemma, and he could only take the middle road by saying: “Do according to your CONSCIENCE.” Some others even jeered at Confucius for not being aboveboard in criticizing his student behind his back. So, what do you see in “right or wrong” here?
[版主回覆06/21/2010 18:37:00]I still remember that at one point, Confucius said that we should do what is appropriate at the time of doing that particular thing and I suppose, also in the special circusmtances of the case. (君子時中). Of course, one could say that that is equivalent to saying nothing because that is question begging! What do we mean by the right thing at the right time? I suppose that he was trying not not to answer the question but to state the difficulty of finding a "one rule fit all" rule. Life is too complicated to be conveniently fitted into one simple formula. All we can reasonably be expected to do is to give some guidelines on what one should do under certain circumstances, not give a universally applicable and unalterable law which we can use under all cirumstances. That is the ambiguity of life itself. If it is like that, there is no use blaming the mirror! And what is right thing at the right time depends on so many variable factors. So all we can do is to list out what the factors may be. That I suppose is what Confucius is doing: he gave numerous examples of what should be done under certain specific circumstances. But examples remain examples. We may derive a principle from the example but that does not mean that the principle itself is universally applicable regardless of time, place, person and context!