Confucius: The Man and the Myth
by H. C. Greel John Day Co., New York, 1949
Reviewed by C. C. Lao
I. General Survey
This book is a work of elaboration. In sixteen chapters the author has discussed the problems about Confucius from all sides. It must be first observed that the author considers his work as a new attempt at the Confucian studies. He asserts that Confucius as represented by tradition was a distorted portrait, and. that it is necessary for an understanding of Confucius to set him free from traditional converings. Thus much space is devoted to discussions on the authenticity of texts. These discussions are in large proportion so coincident with the opinions of the Chinese sceptic school of historians that it seems to us that the author himself is imbued with their color. Copious citation from the sceptics is one of the outstanding features of the book, which may have won applause in America, but it will be estimated in another way by us Chinese.
There is evidence that the author has taken little notice of the results of historical investigations conducted by other scholars than the sceptics. This intellectual partiality has brought many flaws upon his work. He means to trans-value Confucius, but the result is that, he has transformed him, at least in some important aspects.
Deficient as it is, this book should not he regarded as a failure. Though some of the author's judgments are really seriously dubious, yet he has worked with a vision far superior to that of most of his contemporaries. He approaches his problem through an understanding of world-civilization. If he is not successful in setting Confucius free from traditional coverings, he is at least successful in setting himself free from Occidental prejudices.
II. Summary and Review
The whole volume is divided into three parts. First part deals with the method and an external investigation upon the historical background of Confucius. This part is entitled "Background". The second part, entitled "Confucius", deals with Confucius' biography, teachings, philosophy and political ideas. The third part, entitled "Confucianism", deals with the influence of his doctrine upon China and the Western World.
In the first part which contains three chapters, the author declares his fundamental stand. He discredits the "tradition", and at tempts to touch the "truth" by a new approach. His authority is only the Analects and Mencius. Other ancient texts are abandoned as forgeries. Here his sceptical tendency is striking. Even in the Analects, several sections are refuted. To wit, section 9.8 in Analects is said to be not reliable. His reason is only that, this paragraph describes Confucius as a superstitious man. This seems to show that his standard to distinguish forgeries from reliable texts is only a presupposition. It may be reduced to such an argument: Confucius must not be so and so (presupposed); but now certain texts describe him so; therefore, they must be forgeries. However, this kind of argument is not convincing.
His investigation upon the social and political conditions of ancient China in the period of Confucius is sufficiently acceptable. Though quite simple, it is correct.
The second part contains seven chapters, covering more than 140 pages. The author describes Confucius in a new form far different from "tradition" and sometimes different from "truth" also. Confucius becomes a revolutionary thinker who "hoped that he might be able to set up an authority to replace the Chou King;" who had no faith in immutable truth; and, finally, who held an ideal of cooperative world similar to that of the Western democratists.
It may be observed that, only part of these assertions are justifiable. The other "discoveries" seem too imaginative to be acceptable.
This done, the author argues that Confucius was in reality such a man, and was successively distorted by later Confucians. The result of this distortion formed the "Traditional Confucius." In the course of the process of this distortion, Taoism, Moism and Legalism played their parts. To trace this process and to observe the influence of Confucians, the author proceeds to the final part which contains six chapters. Of them, the most significant one is chapter XII—"From Man to Myth". The author discusses the growth of "legend of Confucius" from the time when Moism arose, and makes several assertions for explanation.
Firstly, he considers the story of abdication as an invention of Confucians-though not of Confucius himself. And it is said to be invented with the intention against hereditary kinship. The author argued that "In Analects, it was declared that ministers should be elected from among the whole people on the basis of their virtue, and in antiquity this had been done. The logical next step was to declare that kings, too, should not inherit their positions but should be elected for their virtue and ability." (P. 186). Then he proceeds to say that Mencius himself seemed to have believed that he ought to be king. And as no such chance came to him, he developed a philosophy of jealousy, despising the ruler. Here is where the consciousness of superiority of Confucians originated. But if the Confucians preached the story of abdication with a revolutionary purpose, as the author alleged; why did the rulers tolerate it? The author answered that: Because the rulers wanted their help. Rulers of that period hoped to control the whole China. And the Confucians alone had "regular discipline for training men for government service." They were useful to the kings, and so became authoritative day by day.
But authority begets corruption. As "Confucianism" became a profession, easy and profitable, it attracted riffraff as carrion draws vultures. The result was that: "Vulgar Confucians" increased rapidly. These "Vulgar self-entitled Confucians" were ignorant of Confucius' doctrine. Misunderstandings, with or without ulterior motives, had been inevitable. Additionally, Moism, Taoism, and Legalism arose one by one (as the author believes). External attacks got greater and greater; Vulgar Confucians began to be influenced; and Confucius was successively distorted, until many forgeries were created and the legend had its full growth. Up to Han Dynasty Confucianism had been turned into a complex body mingled with Taoist and Legalist ideas.
In chapter XU, many forgeries are discussed. We need not repeat the details here.
After describing the "disaster" of Confucians in Ch'in Dynasty and their "triumph" in Han Dynasty (there are few things noteworthy in these chapters), the author hastens to the Ching Dynasty. One sentence brings Confucians to the 17th from the first century. Then he goes on to tell the story of Kang-hsi Emperor. Sung Ju (Confucianism of the Sung Dynasty) is treated by him as Confucian Orthodoxy and therefore irrelevant to his research. However this is hard to be appreciated. In the history Confucianism, the importance of Sung Ju can not be overlooked from any point of view. Even if we regard the whole development of Confucianism only as a process of distortion, we can not deny that, it was Sung Ju who brought this distortion to its summit.
In this conclusion on the influence of Confucians, upon Chinese politics, the author says that, two of Confucius' ideas were realized in political system of China. They were the system of examination and the post of official censors. Then he concludes that: "These things made for a degree of democracy" in China. But he still holds that Confucius after Han Dynasty was thoroughly distorted.
Here we see a theoretical gap. If in reality Confucius is distorted by "tradition" to such an extent that "traditional Confucius" became entirely heterogeneous with "true Confucius", we can not but doubt, whether the "true Confucius" could exert any influence upon Chinese history and society. A thinker can influence history only in so far as he can be understood by people. If Confucius was really a democratist but was never so recognized, how could his characteristic opinions he preserved and realized? If tradition is cut off from truth, the truth can be only buried, waiting for discovering, but can not exert any influence.
This dilemma is not in itself serious. For it arises only under such misunderstanding as the author's. Confucius has actually influenced Chinese history, and in some aspects has really been distorted. But the tradition did not represent him far from the truth. Though Confucius, as a philosopher, is not identical with what the later Confucians described him to be, yet we can find no essential discrepancy between the, true visage and the tradition al portrait.
In the two final chapters, the author makes an investigation upon the relation between Confucius' doctrine and Western democracy. He concludes that the two basic conceptions which turned out to be the principles of French Revolution, came from China. They were the conception of human equality and the conception of the right of revolution. He cites much to prove it. One citation from Voltaire seems to be the most important.
These opinions are of high significance. Whether one would agree with him or not, this is a noteworthy suggestion.
III. Discussions on Special Problems
In this section, we are going to discuss two special problems that are incapable of being observed in preceding section. The first problem is the story of abdication of sage-kings in ancient China. The second is the relation between Taoism and the "original" philosophy.
(1) The Story of Abdication
As is stated above, the author holds that this story was an invention of Confucius. We should agree with him that this legend in its moralized form can not, be wholly true, and those Confucians who were amazingly interested in talking about it (such as Mencius) might have their political purpose. But this story is not necessarily an invention without any fact as its basis. Nextly, though Mencius might have his political purpose, when he preached this story, yet it could not be his purpose to put himself on the throne. Reasons may be briefly given.
Firstly, we should be conscious of the process of our own judging. When we go to explain abdication as an ulterior invention, we have presupposed that abdication is not a possible fact. If we have no direct evidence to prove this invention, it is necessary for us to have evidence to disprove the possibility of abdication as fact. It not, what we can say would only be that, this story "may be" false. But it still "may be" true.
This problem can be investigated only through a scrutiny, of the early history or Eastern tribes living in close connection with China, since there is no direct evidence capable of being used. And this indirect method is reliable in investigating problems of possibility. For, if the Eastern tribes had a general course of political action in their early stage, it would not seem likely that ancient China alone was diverse.
It should be observed that the problem of abdication is a problem closely connected with inter-tribal election. For, tearing off its moral covering, we shall find that abdication as a fact is nearly identical with election. Both show a process permitting one to be king (the common leader of tribes) irrespective of heredity. If there were elections, there might be abdication. Now, let us sec whether there are such elections held in Eastern tribes.
In history, two facts at least are certain. Firstly, the Huns elected their common leader. Secondly, in Liao Dynasty the king was initially elected by an assemble—though this elective system was later replaced by hereditary system. In both cases, the candidacy was limited. Only the chief of a tribe could be elected as common leader or king.
In 13th and 14th century, Mongolians had their "Khuriltai" —an important assemble; one of its functions was to elect king. This must be a more familiar case for the Western scholars.
By these evidences, it may be safely alleged that inter-tribal election was prevalent in Eastern tribes in their early stage. It seems that inheritance was not original. The normal course for the birth of common leader or king was election. Inheritance replaced election step by step, when election caused anarchy and intrigue.
Whether Hsun and Yu were really wise kings, we had better suspend our judgment. But it is clear that so-called abdication is not impossible. For, as stated above, abdication is essentially election. The only difference is that, the former is a moralized form of the latter.
As the belief that China might be special in political history is base less, we must concede that the elections in ancient China were similar to those in other Eastern tribes. This being conceded, we have no reason to agree with the author in asserting that Mencius preached the story abdication because he himself hoped to be king. For by election only the leaders of tribes may be king. In Mencius' time he could only be elected from among the rulers of states. But Mencius was only a friend of rulers. It is possible that when Mencius preached the story of abdication, his intention was probably to make the king of Chi the king of China, but not himself.
(2) Taoism
The author wrote without hesitation that, Taoism was essentially a reaction against the prevalent modes of thinking (p. 195), and Lao Tzu offered a much easier way of arriving at truth. He obviously considered the Taoist ideas to be arising later than Confucius' doctrine. This is similar to the opinions of Chinese scepticis. But however this assertion is quite questionable.
By recent study of Chinese historians, one dispute, which has endured for many years, seems to have been put to an end. This is the problem of the date of I-King. Formerly, the sceptical historicans held that I-King was written in a time a little earlier (ever later) than Confucius' time. But now, new conclusion has been arrived at—that is: the original texts of I-King were written during the period of King Wu of Chu Dynasty. (see: "On the Date of the Kwa-tzu and Yao-tzu of I-King" by Prof. Chu Wan-li, Bulletin of the College of Arts, Taiwan University, No. 1, June, 1950) This conclusion is quite significant in investigating the source of Taoist ideas. For we should remember that the basic conception of Taoism is "Becoming." A complete discussion on this point will be too long to be contained in this review. What we can say here is only that both in Lao-tzu and Chuang-tzu, "Principle of Becoming" is dominant. And the "book of changes," superfluous to explain, was also based on the "Principle of Becoming." Such an idea of nature and life is essentially different from that of Confucius whose philosophy took "eternity of value" as its center (this is also misunderstood by the author). It is beyond doubt that before Confucius' philosophy arose, there had been in China a "Philosophy of Becoming." And it was this philosophy which supplied a foundation for Taoism and the basic philosophical principle for I-King. Lao-tzu might be written earlier or later, but the ideas offered by it, were just those ideas of the original philosophy in China.
Therefore, Taoism was by no means a "reaction" against earlier tradition. On the contrary Confucius' philosophy is more likely to be thus treated.
As for the other point—that the Taoist method of acquiring true knowledge was an easier way, I can only say that, if it may be said so, this term "easiness" must have its special meaning other than lexical. For few people would agree that to overcome human desire is not difficult or quite comfortable; and to overcome desire was the fundamental method held by Lao-tzu.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Ching-ting Mountain
Li Po
Flock of birds have flown high and away;
A solitary drift of cloud, too, has gone, wandering on.
And I sit alone with Ching-ting Peak, towering beyond.
We never grow tired of each other, the mountain and I.
Translated by Shigeyoshi Obata.
Illness
Po Chu-i
Dear friends, there is no cause for so much sympathy.
I shall certainly manage from time to time to take my walks abroad.
All that matters is an active mind. What is the use of feet?
By land one can ride in a carrying-chair; by water, be rowed in a boat.
Translated by Arthur Waley.