Tension between literature and culture

Author: Leng Chengjin / Country:
Publisher:
Publishing Time: 2002-05-01
Features: Regarding discussions on life and destiny, the most representative is a passage from Mencius·The Descent of the Sage: "The mouth's taste, the eyes' color, the ears' sound, the nose's smell, and the limbs' comfort are nature. There is destiny in them, but the nobleman does not call them nature. Benevolence to father and son, righteousness to ruler and subject, propriety to host and guest, wisdom to the worthy, and the sage's understanding of the Dao are destiny. There is nature in them, but the nobleman does not call them destiny." Mencius, through the unattainability of sensory pleasures and the attainability of benevolence, righteousness, and the Dao, defined the social nature of benevolence and righteousness as the great nature of humans. Thus, the attainability of sensory pleasures became external to human destiny, while the social nature of benevolence and morality became internal to human nature. This is the exchange between nature and destiny, as well as the exchange between human natural essence and social roles. It can be said that this exchange has great historical necessity and rationality, and also sets the basis for human existence. This exchange has had a profound impact on Chinese philosophy's theory of human nature and has direct and far-reaching significance for political ideology. However, any theory, in the process of use, inevitably brings out its negative aspects. Mencius's theory of innate goodness often suppresses individuality and reasonable desires in reality, at least serving as an excuse.
In discussing life and destiny, Zhuangzi primarily takes human natural essence as the foundation and external achievements and destiny as the application, defining human natural essence as something natural. For example, Zhuangzi states: "I was born in the mountains and am at ease in the mountains, so it is; I grew up by water and am at ease by water, so it is; I do not know why it is so, so it is destiny" (Reaching Life). "What I call emotionless is that people do not harm themselves internally due to likes and dislikes, and they naturally do not increase them" (De Chong Fu). "Therefore, the nobleman, when to rule the world, is better off doing nothing. Only by doing nothing can one be at ease with the nature of life and destiny" (In Absoluteness). "What I call good is not the benevolence and righteousness of the Confucian school, but allowing the nature of life and destiny to act freely" (Clawed Feet). Human nature and destiny are not benevolence, righteousness, or natural desires, but the constant nature. Only by conforming to this nature can one be considered correct, follow goodness, and be a benevolent person. This is not a simple theory of natural human nature, nor does it take human animalistic sensory desires as the essence of human nature, but elevates the natural characteristic of these desires to the level of ontology, thereby defining it as the essence of human nature. Su Shi's theory of human nature is similar to Zhuangzi's. He explicitly opposes Mencius's theory of human nature and repeatedly argues that human nature is based on human naturalness. Ritual propriety and morality are one with human natural essence and are things that are done naturally without knowing why. He opposes certain rigid political ideologies from being prescribed as human nature. When annotating "One Yin and one Yang constitute the Dao, what continues it is goodness, and what completes it is nature," he says: "In the past, Mencius took goodness as nature, thinking it was the ultimate. After reading the Book of Changes, I realized it was not. Mencius's view of nature was limited to what continues it. Goodness is the manifestation of nature. Mencius did not witness nature but witnessed its manifestation, and thus took what he saw as nature. Nature and goodness are like fire and cooking things. I have never seen fire, yet point to all cooked things as fire—is that acceptable? Cooking things is the effect of fire. May I ask about the difference between nature and the Dao? It is difficult to speak of, but it can be described as similar. The similarity of the Dao is like sound, and the similarity of nature is like hearing. Is there sound before hearing? Is there hearing before sound? These two are either one or two? Confucius said: 'Humans can promote the Dao, but the Dao cannot promote humans.' He also said: 'The divine and the bright depend on the person.' Nature is what makes one human, without it, the Dao cannot be completed" (Volume 7). Goodness is a moral concept, easily rigidified. If it is prescribed as human nature, people may become appendages of certain political ideologies. In fact, the existence state of the theory of innate goodness in Chinese history fully proves this point. The shortcomings of the philosophy of Zhang Zai and Zhu Xi originated from this. In Su Shi's view, goodness is merely a manifestation of nature, not nature itself. Here, The Easy Commentary of Dongpo actually presents a possibility of cutting the connection between nature and ethical orientation, thereby cutting the connection between innate goodness and emotional evil. As a result, goodness, as "the effect of nature," may become the ethical attribute of emotion. Often, these subtle differences lead to the essential differences between two theories. Su Shi sees water as the state of the universe's generation when Yin and Yang first interact, which is also significant. He says: "When Yin and Yang interact, they generate things, and the beginning is water. Water is the boundary between non-existence and existence. It begins to separate from non-existence and enters existence. Laozi recognized this, so he said, 'The highest goodness is like water,' and 'Water is close to the Dao.' The virtue of the sage, though it can be named, is not confined to one thing, like water's ever-changing form. This highest goodness is close to the Dao but not the Dao. As for water before its generation, when Yin and Yang have not yet interacted, it is boundless and contains nothing, yet it cannot be called non-existence. This is the true similarity to the Dao. When Yin and Yang interact to generate things, the Dao and things connect to generate goodness. When things are born, Yin and Yang are hidden, and when goodness is established, the Dao is invisible" (Volume 7). In The Easy Commentary of Dongpo, "water" is a spiritual concept. The boundary between non-existence and existence determines the mystery of "water." It connects to the Dao but is not the Dao—"'close to the Dao but not the Dao,' because the Dao can only be approached and cannot be fully embodied. 'Water' also descends to things but is not a specific thing—"'not confined to one thing, like water's ever-changing form.' The material form of 'water' is its ever-changing form. Then, the metaphysical essence of 'water' is the natural Dao that does not harm all things and follows the natural laws of all things. Therefore, Su Shi's view of the Dao inevitably leads to 'each thing has its own Dao,' which inevitably conflicts with Zhu Xi's rigid and unchanging 'Heavenly Principle.' 'Water' has no fixed form, adapts to things, and takes the form of things as its own form. This is the independent 'form' of 'water.' Su Shi attributes the generation of the universe to 'water,' thereby connecting it to human life. This is an important feature of Su Shi's philosophy.
Second, ontology. Here, the term ontology refers to the orientation and rationality of the existence of all things in the world. Su Shi's ontology in The Easy Commentary of Dongpo is closely related to his cosmogony, forming a complete ideological system of the universe's generation and existence. In his ontology, discussions on "independent transformation," "" (), "" (), valuing tranquility, and prioritizing softness, together with his cosmogony, form a complete ideological system of the universe's generation and existence, more clearly reflecting the ideological and theoretical characteristics of The Easy Commentary of Dongpo. His ontology clearly embodies the idea that each thing has its own nature, and nature is reasonable. It is an inheritance and development of the theory of "independent transformation" proposed by Guo Xiang in his commentary on the Zhuangzi. In The Easy Commentary of Dongpo, when explaining "the sun and moon revolve, alternating between cold and heat, the (Qian) principle forms males, and the (Kun) principle forms females," Su Shi wrote a long passage, emphasizing that "hierarchy is self-positioned," "rigidity and softness are self-determined," "fortune and misfortune are self-generated," "changes are self-visible," "there has been no choice," "there has been no intention," and "I have this Dao, and each thing gets it" (Volume 7). All these emphasize the naturalness of things' nature, even for sages, it is no exception. The benevolence and righteousness of sages are entirely the result of "what they encounter and act upon," where "the mind attaches to things." Su Shi emphasizes "acting according to one's nature" and "each thing gets what it needs," essentially believing that nothing has a rigid definition and is naturally formed in its process of operation. In essence, it leans more toward psychological principles and an aestheticized life attitude, closely related to Guo Xiang's "independent transformation" thought in his commentary on the Zhuangzi, but it overcomes certain harmful aspects of Guo Xiang's thought, greatly develops its rationality, and creates its own ideological system.
Guo Xiang said a lot about "independent transformation," but his major flaw was that "human hearts are not satisfied" (Autumn Water). In a certain sense, it is a "natural joy within the Confucian system" of "independent transformation." Of course, in many chapters and paragraphs of Guo Xiang's Commentary on the Zhuangzi, there is a critique of the Confucian system, believing that rituals are mere decoration and may not align with human nature or suit the circumstances of the time. Therefore, it is not only possible to conclude that the Confucian system is natural from Guo Xiang's theory but also to find that nature is higher than the ruler's command. The basis for nature being higher than everything should be traced back to this. Su Shi inherited and developed Guo Xiang's thought of commenting on the Zhuangzi in this direction. Su Shi's ontology in The Easy Commentary of Dongpo achieves a complete "independent transformation": "All things have fixed forms, except water, which takes the form of things. Even though water has no fixed form, taking the form of things can be predetermined. Therefore, artisans take it as the standard, and nobles take it as the model. Only because it has no fixed form can it encounter things without harm. Only because it is not harmed can it traverse dangers without losing its integrity. From this perspective, nothing in the world is as trustworthy as water" (Volume 3). Here, "integrity" refers to a self-sufficient spirit that transcends all external things, unbound by anything external. This spirit is not limited to a specific time or place; it permeates the universe. It "takes the form of things," so it is absolutely self-sufficient and absolutely free. What is particularly important is that because of this spirit's absolute self-sufficiency and freedom, it has "no fixed form" and "communicates with the mind," so it "encounters things without harm" and can ultimately "overcome things,"ing everything. He says: "Although there are difficulties and ease in what is encountered, yet one never stops pursuing it—this is the heart of water. The things that hinder me are limited, but the heart has no end, so it will ultimately overcome them. Therefore, the reason water, being the most soft, can overcome things is that it does not strive with force but communicates with the mind. Without striving with force, it appears soft; by communicating with the mind, it is internally firm" (Volume 3). This is the relationship between the mind and things. "The Dao," "water," and "the mind" are absolutely independent, self-sufficient, and free existences, as well as existences with absolute positive value.
Third, the theory of emotional foundation. Su Shi largely agrees with Zhuangzi's naturalistic view of life and destiny. In his annotations to Shuo Gua, he says: "Therefore, the nobleman values nature and destiny. To reach nature and destiny, one must trace back to their origins. What one eats is because of hunger, and what one drinks is because of thirst—how could it come from the outside! Humans' ability to eat and drink without learning is clear. Why not wait and see? Where do hunger and thirst come from? Is there not something that has never been hungry or thirsty? Thus, nature can be seen. Those who have nature and those who see it—who can unify these two? Then one reaches destiny." (Volume 9). Hunger and thirst are human natural nature. Only by grasping this internal natural nature can one grasp external human destiny. This view of life and destiny is very similar to Zhuangzi's definition of human nature as naturally natural. Of course, neither Zhuangzi nor Su Shi take human animalistic sensory desires as the essence of human nature but elevate the natural characteristic of these desires to the level of ontology, thereby defining it as the essence of human nature. Su Shi says: "The nobleman daily cultivates goodness to eliminate evil, and evil daily diminishes, yet there is what cannot be eliminated. The petty person daily cultivates evil to eliminate goodness, and goodness daily diminishes, yet there is what cannot be eliminated. What cannot be eliminated cannot be added by Yao and Shun, nor can it be destroyed by Jie and Zhou. Is this not nature? When nature reaches this point, it is called destiny. Emotion is the movement of nature. Tracing back to destiny, and following down to emotion, there is nothing without nature. Nature and emotion are not distinguished by good or evil. When they disperse and act, they are called emotion. Destiny and nature are not distinguished by heaven or man. When they reach one without self, they are called destiny." (Volume 1). Zhu Xi wrote Discourse on Miscellaneous Learning and took The Easy Commentary of Dongpo as the first heresy. He said: "Su Shi's words are close to reason. To say 'evil diminishes and yet cannot be eliminated' seems to say the innate goodness itself. To say 'good diminishes and yet cannot be eliminated' seems to say the sprouting of innate conscience. To take this as the location of nature seems reasonable." Of course, Zhu Xi knew that what Su Shi said was not the "Heavenly Principle" he spoke of but something based on and transcending natural nature: "When nature reaches this point, it is called destiny." Then, it inevitably leads to the conclusion: "Emotion is the movement of nature. Tracing back to destiny, and following down to emotion, there is nothing without nature." Thus, Su Shi deduces emotion from human natural nature, and then allows emotion to enter the level of ontology, placing emotion, nature, and destiny on the same plane. In practical application, this inevitably leads to emotion as the foundation, which is what we call the theory of emotional foundation. In The Easy Commentary of Dongpo, Su Shi repeatedly argues that human nature is based on human naturalness. Ritual propriety and morality are one with human natural essence and are things that are done naturally without knowing why. It can be said that Su Shi's theory of human nature deduces human emotion from human natural sensory needs. This human emotion inherits the naturalness of human sensory needs but transcends material natural needs, rising to the metaphysical level and integrating with nature, principle, and Dao, acquiring a nature that opposes the constraints of political ideology. Therefore, Su Shi's theory of emotional foundation has become the most brilliant chapter in traditional Chinese human theory and learning, having a crucial impact on the liberation of Chinese literary and personal character, especially on traditional literary thought, which is even more significant.