The debate between Zhu and Lu

Author: Peng Yongjie
Publisher:
Publish Date: 2005-04-01
Features: Peng Yongjie's The Debate Between Zhu and Lu: A Comparative Study of the Philosophies of Zhu Xi and Lu Jiuyuan (published by the People's Press) provides a philosophical analysis and summary of the famous academic debate in the history of scholarship between Zhu Xi (the synthesizer of the Cheng-Zhu School of Neo-Confucianism) and Lu Jiuyuan (the founder of the Lu-Wang School of Mind-Neo-Confucianism).
First, the author argues that Zhu and Lu were in agreement in defining the essence of Confucianism as "teaching people how to be human." However, they differed in how they understood "teaching people how to be human." Zhu Xi emphasized knowledge of ethics, while Lu Jiuyuan emphasized the practice of morality. The characteristic of Zhu Xi's philosophy lies in providing philosophical explanation and justification for the Confucian ethical norms, whereas the characteristic of Lu Jiuyuan's philosophy lies in providing philosophical explanation for Confucian morality and its practical foundation. However, Zhu Xi had both ethical and moral philosophy, while Lu Jiuyuan had only moral philosophy, without ethical philosophy. The characteristic of Zhu Xi's moral philosophy is that it regulates morality through ethics. Compared to previous explanations of the similarities and differences between Zhu and Lu, which attributed them to differences in fundamental propositions like "Xing is Li" (human nature is principle) and "Xin is Li" (the mind is principle), or to differences in learning methods such as "simplicity and ease" versus "fragmentation" or "extensive reading" versus "focusing on essentials," or to differences in the purpose of their teachings like "the mind and heart are one" versus "the mind and heart are two," the author argues that the difference between Zhu and Lu in emphasizing ethics versus morality can be traced back to the difference between Confucius's emphasis on "Dao" and Mencius's emphasis on "zhi." The diachronic difference between Confucius and Mencius manifested as a synchronic difference in the brothers Cheng, and later in Zhu and Lu, took the form of explicit schools and systems. The tension between ethics and morality has been an internal contradiction within Confucianism. Based on this, the author explores the academic origins of Lu Jiuyuan, arguing that it is preferable to acknowledge Lu Jiuyuan and his disciples' claim that he derived his ideas "from reading Mencius" rather than, in the absence of historical evidence, attributing his academic origins to Cheng Hao based solely on the internal consistency of his thought—consistency that can be reasonably explained by a shared intellectual origin.
Second, the author discusses and defines the philosophical connotation of "Dao-tong" (the lineage of the Way), summarizing it as a combination of identification consciousness, orthodox consciousness, and the consciousness of spreading the Way. This combination exerts both a promoting and a hindering effect on the development of Confucianism. Based on this, the author analyzes Zhu and Lu's debates over Dao-tong both externally and internally, as well as their defense of it. This also corresponds to the dissolution of the academic justification for persistently adhering to narrow Dao-tong consciousness and factionalism in modern New Confucianism. This point holds significance for reinterpreting the history of Confucianism, especially the history of Neo-Confucianism, as well as for developing Confucian resources in the contemporary era.
Third, the author argues that the theory of human nature is the philosopher's fundamental judgment and evaluation of human nature, a hypothesis about the goodness or evil of human nature. From a theoretical perspective, the theory of innate goodness leads to the theory of moral governance, while the theory of innate evil leads to the theory of legal governance. For Confucian moral theory, the theory of innate goodness is the basis for the possibility of morality, while the evil in the post-natal experiential world is the basis for the necessity of morality. The academic mission and contribution of Neo-Confucianism lie in providing a metaphysical argument for the theory of innate goodness as the cornerstone of Confucian moral theory, and in philosophically justifying how innate goodness can give rise to evil in the post-natal experiential world and then be restored through moral cultivation. Zhu Xi addresses this by distinguishing between the "Heavenly Principle nature" (Heavenly-endowed nature) and the "qi-zhi nature" (nature of temperament), and by advocating the cultivation method of "investigation of things to exhaust principles" ("understanding the Heavenly Principle, extinguishing human desires"). Lu Jiuyuan addresses this by opposing the "original mind" with "external desires" and advocating the cultivation method of "investigating the mind to eliminate desires." Therefore, the similarities and differences between Zhu and Lu are reflected in their different approaches to addressing the shared temporal challenges of Confucianism.