A Short History of Chinese Philosophy (10 page)

The Will of God and Existence of Spirits

There remains, however, a basic question: How to persuade people thus to love one another? One may tell them, as was said above, that the practice of all—embracing love is the only way to benefit the world and that every humanhearted man is one who practices all-embracing love. Yet people may still ask: Why should I personally act to benefit the world and why should 1 be a human—hearted man? One may then argue further that if the world as a whole is benefited, this means benefit for every individual in the world as well. Or as Mo Tzu says: "He who loves others, must also be loved by others. He who benefits others, must also be benefited by others. He who hates others, must also be hated by others. He who injures others, must also be injured by others."
(Mo-tzu,
ch. 17.) Thus, then, the love of others is a sort of personal insurance or investment, which pays, as Americans would say. Most people, however, are too shortsighted to see the value of a long term investment of this sort, and there are a few instances in which such an investment does, indeed, fail to pay.

In order, therefore, to induce people to practice the principle of all-embracing love, Mo Tzu, in addition to the foregoing arguments, introduces a number of religious and political sanctions. Thus in the
Mo-tzu
there are chapters on "The Will of Heaven," and also ones titled Proof of the Existence of Spirits." In these we read that Cod exists; that He loves mankind; and that His Will is that all men should love one another. He constantly super

090 , MO TZU, THE FIRST OPPONENT OF CONFUCIUS

vises the activities of men, especially those of the rulers of men. He punishes with calamities persons who disobey His Will, and rewards with good fortune those who obey. Besides God, there are also numerous lesser spirits who likewise reward men who practice all—embracing love, and punish those who practice "discrimination."

In this connection there is an interesting story about Mo Tzu: When Mo Tzu was once ill, Tieh Pi came to him and inquired: Sir, you hold that the spirits are intelligent and control calamities and blessings. They reward the good and punish the evil. Now you are a sage. How then can you be ill? Is it that your teaching is not entirely correct or that the spirits are after all not intelligent? Mo Tzu replied: Though I am ill, why should the spirits be unintelligent? There are many ways by which a man can contract diseases. Some are contracted from cold or heat, some from fatigue. If there are a hundred doors and only one be closed, will there not be ways by which robbers can enter? "'
(Mo-tzu,
ch. 48-) In modern logical terminology, Mo Tzu would say that punishment by the spirits is a sufficient cause for the disease of a man, but not its necessary cause.

A Seeming Inconsistency

Here it is timely to point out that both the Mohists and the Comfucianists seem to be inconsistent in their attitude toward the existence of spirits and the performance of rituals connected with the spirits.

Certainly it seems inconsistent for the Mohists to have believed in the existence of the spirits, yet at the same time to have opposed the elaborate rituals that were conducted on the occasion of funerals and of the making of sacrifices to the ancestors. Likewise, it seems inconsistent that the Confucianists stressed those funeral and sacrificial rituals, yet did not believe in the existence of the spirits. The Mohists, for their part, were quite ready to point out this seeming inconsistency as regards the Confucianists. Thus we read in the
Mo—tzu:
Kung — meng Tzu [a Confucianist] said: 'There are no spirits.' Again he said: 'The superior man should learn the rituals of sacrifice. Mo Tzu said: 'To hold that there are no spirits, and yet to learn sacrificial ceremonies, is like learning the ceremonies of hospitality when there are no guests, or throwing fish nets when there are no fish. (Ch. 48.)

Yet the seeming inconsistencies of the Confucianists and Mohists are both unreal. According to the former, the reason for performing the sacrificial rituals is no longer a belief that the spirits actually exist, though no doubt this was the original reason. Rather, the performance springs from the sentiment of respect toward his departed forebears held by the man who offers the sacrifice. Hence the meaning of the ceremonies is poetic, not religious. This theory was later developed by
Hsiln
Tzu and his school of Confucianism in detail, as we shall see in chapter thirteen of this book. Hence there is no real inconsistency at all.

OOi

MO TZU, THE FIRST OPPONENT OF CONFUCIUS

Likewise there is no aetual inconsistency in the Mohist point of view, for Mo Tzu' s proof of the existence of spirits is done primarily in order that he may introduce a religious sanction for his doctrine of all-embracing love, rather than because of any real interest in supernatural matters. Thus in his chapter on Proof of the Existence of Spirits, he attributes the existing confusion of the world to a doubt (among men) as to the existence of spirits and a failure lo understand that they can reward the good and punish the bad. He then asks: "If now all the people of the world could be made to believe that the spirits can reward the good and punish the bad, would the world then be in chaos? (Ch. 31.) Thus his doctrine of the Will of God and the existence of spirits is only to induce people to believe that they will be, rewarded if they practice all—embracing love, and punished if they do not. Such a belief among the people was something useful; hence Mo Tzu wanted it. "Economy of expenditure" in the funeral and sacrificial services was also useful; hence Mo Tzu wanted it too. From his ultra—utilitarian point of view, there was no inconsistency in wanting both things, since both were useful.

Origin of the State

Besides religious sanctions, political ones are also needed if people are to practice all-embracing love.

In the
Mo-tzu,
there are three chapters titled Agreement with the Superior, in which Mo Tzu expounds his theory of the origin of the state. According to this theory, the authority of the ruler of a state comes from two sources: the will of the people and the Will of God. Furthermore, the main task of the ruler is to supervise the activities of the people, rewarding those who practice all -embracing love and punishing those who do not. In order to do this effectively, his authority must be absolute. At this point we may ask: Why should people voluntarily choose to have such an absolute authority over them?

The answer, for Mo Tzu, is that the people accept such an authority, not because they prefer it, but because they have no alternative. According to him, before the creation of an organized state, people lived in what Thomas Hobbes has called "the state of nature." At this early time, "everyone had his own standard of right and wrong. When there was one man, there was one standard. When there were two men, there were two standards. When there were ten men, there were ten standards. The more people there were, the more were there standards. Every man considered himself as right and others as wrong.

"The world was in great disorder and men were like birds and beasts. They understood that all the disorders of the world were due to the fact that there was no political ruler. Therefore, they selected the most virtuous and most able man of the world, and established him as the Son of Heaven."
(Mo-tzu,
ch.

II.) Thus the ruler of the state was first established by the will of the people, in order to save themselves from anarchy.

In another chapter bearing the same title, Mo Tzu says: Of old when God

094

MO TZU, THE FIRST OPPONENT OF CONFUCIUS

and the spirits established the state and cities and installed rulers, it was not to make their rank high or their emolument substantial....It was to procure benefits for the people and eliminate their adversities; to enrich the poor and increase the few; and to bring safety out of danger and order out of confusion. (Ch.

I2.)According to this statement, therefore, the state and its ruler were established through the Will of God.

No matter what was the way in which the ruler gained his power, once he was established, he, according to Mo Tzu, issued a mandate to the people of the world, saying: "Upon hearing good or evil, one shall report it to one's superior. What the superior thinks to be right, all shall think to be right. What the superior thinks to be wrong, all shall think to be wrong." (Ch. II.) This leads Mo Tzu to the following dictum: "Always agree with the superior; never follow the inferior.
(Ibid.)
Thus, Mo Tzu argues, the state must be totalitarian and the authority of its ruler absolute. This is an inevitable conclusion to his theory of the origin of the state. For the state was created precisely in order to end the disorder which had existed owing to the confused standards of right and wrong. The state's primary function, therefore, is, quoting Mo Tzu, "to unify the standards. Within the state only one standard can exist, and it must be one which is fixed by the state itself. No other standards can be tolerated, because if there were such, people would speedily return to 'the state of nature " in which there could be nothing but disorder and chaos. In this political theory we may see Mo Tzu's development of the professional ethics of the
hswh,
with its emphasis upon group obedience and discipline. No doubt it also reflects the troubled political conditions of Mo Tzu's day, which caused many people to look with favor on a centralized authority, even if it were to be an autocratic one.

So, then, there can be only one standard of right and wrong. Right, for Mo Tzu, is the practice of mutual all—embracingness, and wrong is the practice of "mutual discrimination." Through appeal to this political sanction, together with his religious one, Mo Tzu hoped to bring all people of the world to practice his principle of all-embracing love.

Such was Mo Tzu's teaching, and it is the unanimous report of all sources of his time that in his own activities he was a true example of it.

MO TZU, THE FIRST OPPONENT OF CONFUCIUS

CHAPTER 6

THE FIRST PHASE OF TAOISM:

YANG CHU

IN the
Confucian Analects,
we are told that Confucius, while traveling from state to state,

met many men whom he called
yin che,
''those who obscure themselves," and described as persons who had "escaped from the world." (XIV, 39-) These recluses ridiculed Confucius for what they regarded as his vain efforts to save the world. By one of them he was described as the one who knows he cannot succeed, yet keeps on trying to do so."
1

(XTV, 41.) To these attacks, Tzu Lu, a disciple of Confucius, once replied: It is unrighteous to refuse: to serve in office. If the regulations between old and young in family life are not to be set aside, how is it then that you set aside the duty that exists between sovereign and subject? In your desire to maintain your personal purity, you subvert the great relationship of society Lthc relationship between sovereign and subject]."
(Ibid.,
XVI11, 7.)

The Early Taoists and the Recluses

The recluses were thus individualists who "desired to maintain their personal purity.

They were also, in a sense, defeatists who thought (hat the world was so bad that nothing could be done for it. One of them is reported in ihe
Analects
to have said: "The world is a swelling torrent, and is there anyone to change it? (XVIII, 6.) It was from men of this sort, most of them living far away from other men in the world of nature, that the Taoists were probably originally drawn.

The Taoists, however, were not ordinary recluses who escaped the world, desiring to "maintain their personal purity, ' and who, once in retirement, made no attempt ideologically to justify their conduct. On the contrary, they were men who, having gone into seclusion, attempted to work out a system of thought that would give meaning to their action. Among them, Yang Chu seems to have been the earliest prominent exponent.

Yang Chu s dales are not clear, but he must have lived between the time of Mo Tzu (c.

479-c. 381 B.C.) and Mencius (c. 371-c. 189 B.C.). This is in—

O98 THE FIRST PHASE OF

TAOISM:YANG CHU

dicated by the fact that though unmentioned by Mo Tzu, he, by the time of Mencius, had

become as influential as were the Mohists. To quote Mencius himself: "The words of Yang Chu and Mo Ti fill the world."
(Mencius,
Illb, 9.) In the Taoist work known as the
Lieh-tzu,
there is one chapter entitled "Yang Chu," which, according to the traditional view, represents Yang Chu's philosophy. But the authenticity of the
Lieh-tzu
has been much questioned by modern scholarship, and the view expressed in most of the "Yang Chu chapter is not consistent with Yang Chu's ideas as reported in other early reliable sources. Its tenets are those ol extreme hedonism (hence Forke s title,
Yang Chu's Garden of Pleasure"),
whereas in no other early writings do we find Yang Chu being accused as a hedonist. Yang Chu s actual ideas, unfortunately, are nowhere described very consecutively, but must be deduced from scattered references in a number of works by other writers.

Yang Chu s Fundamental Ideas

The
Mencius
says: "The principle of Yang Chu is: 'Each one for himself.' Though he might have profited the whole world by plucking out a single hair, he would not have done it.' (Vila, 26.) The
Lii -shih Ch un -ch iu
(third century B.C.) says: "Yang Sheng valued self."

(XVII, 7.) The
Han-fei-tzu
(also third century) says: There is a man whose policy it is not to enter a city which is in danger, nor to remain in the army. Even for the great profit of the whole world, he would not exchange one hair of his shank....He is one who despises things and values life." (Ch. 50.) And the
Huai-nan-tzu
(second century B.C.) says: Preserving life and maintaining what is genuine in it, not allowing things to entangle one's person: this is what Yang Chu established." (Ch. 13.)