A Source Book in Chinese Philosophy Read online

  Copyright © 1963 by Princeton University Press

  L.C. Card: 62-7398

  ISBN 0-691-01964-9

  ▪

  Chapter 7, “The Natural Way of Lao Tzu,” with additional notes and comments, has been published as The Way of Lao Tzu, copyright © 1963, The Bobbs-Merrill Company.

  ▪

  Publication of this book has been aided by the Ford Foundation program to support publication, through university presses, of works in the humanities and social sciences, as well as by grants from the John Simon Guggenheim Memorial Foundation, the Edward W. Hazen Foundation, and the McInerny Foundation.

  ▪

  Wing-tsit Chan, now Anna R. D. Gillespie Professor of Philosophy at Chatham College, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, is also Professor of Chinese Culture and Philosophy Emeritus at Dartmouth College, Hanover, N.H. He did his undergraduate work at Lingnan University in Canton, China, and received his Ph.D. from Harvard University.

  He has taught both in China and in this country since 1929, and is the author of many distinguished publications in the field of Chinese philosophy.

  ▪

  First Princeton Paperback Edition, 1969

  Fourth Printing, 1973

  19--18--17--16--15-------------

  TO GREGG M. SINCLAIR

  ▪ ▪ ▪--FOREWORD--▪ ▪ ▪

  One of the hopeful signs in these otherwise hectic times in which we are living is the long-overdue realization of the need for mutual understanding between the peoples of the East and those of the West. Genuine understanding of people who are separated from us by great distances or who differ from us in language, in way of life, in social custom, is difficult to achieve, even for those who are sincerely dedicated to this task.

  Such understanding is vital—humanly, intellectually, practically—but it cannot be achieved through any superficial assessment of words or actions which are often unrevealing or possibly even misleading. It can be achieved only through a searching and serious study of the dominant ideas, the motivating beliefs that have, down through the ages, shaped the “mind,” or over-all philosophy, of a race or a nation.

  In getting at this basic philosophy, the only procedure available to the outsider is to study the thought of the intellectual leaders, the molders of the thought of the culture as a whole. And the only way to reach these great minds is through their own words. No amount of second-hand explanation or description or interpretation can assure the student that he is getting at the real mind of the thinker. Studying the original (even in translation), with the aid of knowledgeable guides where necessary—this alone can make for clarity of comprehension and assurance of authenticity.

  This Source Book is devoted to the purpose of providing such a basis for genuine understanding of Chinese thought (and thereby of Chinese life and culture, since the relationship between the two is probably more pronounced in China than in any other country). It brings to English-speaking Westerners the basic materials for serious work in Chinese philosophy, which in its profundity and its long historical development is probably less adequately understood than that of any other great civilization in the world today. By virtue of misguided selection of only ancient texts, or popular texts, or texts which are primarily literary rather than technical, the Chinese philosophical tradition has been distorted out of all proportions. The Western philosopher, if he would be a true philosopher in considering all the experiences, insights, and systematic intellectual speculation of mankind as data for his comprehensive philosophical thinking, can no longer remain blind to the important insights of the great Chinese minds of history. The Chinese philosophers have much to contribute in many areas of the broad quest for truth, and it is high time that we in the West overcome our basic ignorance of this field, or at least attempt to correct the limited and possibly distorted interpretations that we now have.

  This Source Book is indeed a milestone along the complex and difficult road to significant understanding by Westerners of the Asian peoples, and a monumental contribution to the cause of philosophy. It is the first anthology of Chinese philosophy to cover its entire historical development. It provides substantial selections from all the great thinkers and schools in every period—ancient, medieval, modern, and contemporary—and includes in their entirety some of the most important classical texts. It deals with the fundamental and technical as well as the more general aspects of Chinese thought. With its new translation of source materials (some translated for the first time), its explanatory aids where necessary, its thoroughgoing scholarly documentation, this volume will be an indispensable guide for scholars, for college students, for serious readers interested in knowing the real China.

  I must take this opportunity, on behalf of all who are seriously concerned about the development of greater understanding of Asian philosophy, to thank Dr. Chan for producing this significant volume. Dr. Chan has taught Chinese philosophy in both China and the United States and, as far as I know, is the only Chinese philosopher who has taught in the United States in this one field continuously for more than 25 years. He knows thoroughly the needs and problems of students of Chinese philosophy—and, as a public lecturer, he is also well aware of the interests of the educated public. He brings to this work the valuable benefits and advantages of this unique background and experience. The task he has undertaken has been stupendous. Few scholars could have—or would have—undertaken it; no one else could have handled it so well.

  As mentioned by Dr. Chan in the preface, this volume is the second in a series of Source Books in Asian philosophy. The first volume, A Source Book in Indian Philosophy, edited by Dr. S. Radhakrishnan and myself, was published by Princeton University Press in 1957 and was reissued in 1959. “A Source Book in Buddhist Philosophy,” intended as a third volume in this series, is now in preparation.

  Charles A. Moore

  Honolulu, Hawaii

  ▪ ▪ ▪--PREFACE--▪ ▪ ▪

  China has changed more in the twentieth century than in any period in her history. She has overthrown a 3,000-year-old monarchic system. She has replaced the 1,300-year-old examination institution with modern education. Men and women are for the first time equal. And she has embraced Communism. These radical transformations and many more have forced Westerners to ask why they have taken place. The search is no longer one for information but for explanation. Realizing that neither contemporary factors nor external influences alone can provide the answer, they have begun to probe into Chinese thought. And since Chinese thought is predominantly Confucian, they have looked into Confucian teachings with great seriousness.

  The study of Confucianism in the West is not new. James Legge’s translation of the Confucian Classics began a century ago. Unfortunately, Western studies of Chinese philosophy have been largely confined to ancient Confucianism and its rival systems, as if Chinese Buddhism were not Chinese, Neo-Taoism did not exist, and later Confucianism but a footnote to the Confucian Classics or at best a de luxe edition of them. But the fact is that Chinese thought and the Chinese way of life in the last several hundred years have, generally speaking, been the product of Neo-Confucianism, which thrived from the twelfth to the sixteenth century, and Neo-Confucianism is itself an outgrowth of ancient Confucianism, modified by Taoism and Buddhism. Therefore, in order to understand the mind of China, it is absolutely necessary to understand Chinese thought, especially Neo-Confucianism, in its entire historical development. The present book has been prepared primarily to meet this urgent need.

  In attempting to maintain an historical perspective, I have throughout this work tried to strike a balance between the modern, medieval, and ancient periods as well as between Confucianism, Taoism, and Buddhism. The
selections presented herein have been chosen with this balance and perspective in view. In the chapters from the Analects, for example, special attention has been given to sayings on knowledge, human nature, human destiny, Heaven, and the like—perennial problems in Chinese philosophy—but only to the extent that such selectivity does not distort the total teaching of Confucius. Moreover, my choice of philosophers and schools has been guided by their relative influence on the development of Chinese thought, not by the temporary interest of non-Chinese scholars. Many Western scholars, for example, have been much interested in Wang Ch’ung (27-100?), evidently because of his skepticism and naturalism, but have been little interested in Wang Pi (226-249). In terms of philosophical influence, however, Wang Ch’ung is almost insignificant whereas Wang Pi is of tremendous importance. I have therefore given much more space to Wang Pi than to Wang Ch’ung in proportion to the amount of their writing. Finally, my introductions to the translations and comments on specific selections were written not only to make the passages more meaningful and stimulating to the reader, but also to show the interconnections between the various periods and between the different schools of Chinese philosophy.

  Wherever practicable, I have translated whole pieces. The present work includes four books (the Great Learning, the Doctrine of the Mean, the Lao Tzu, and the T’ung-shu [Penetrating the Book of Changes]) by Chou Tun-i and thirty-seven chapters or treatises in their entirety1 besides many chapters almost complete.

  I have chosen to translate the entire material myself instead of using existing materials for several reasons. One reason is to achieve consistency in translation, which is absolutely necessary for an adequate understanding of either an individual work or the historical development of Chinese philosophy. Take, for example, the concept of chung-hsin (loyalty and faithfulness), a basic concept in the Analects.2 It is clear and definite, and no variation in translation is justified. Translations by Waley, Legge, and Lin Yutang are admirable in many respects but they are not consistent.

  The second reason for a fresh translation is that much research has been done and many commentaries have been published since most of the existing translations appeared. Not many existing translations have made use of research scholarship and commentaries in the first place. In any case, recent materials cannot be ignored, for they have thrown much light on various subjects. There are about 350 existing commentaries on the Lao Tzu and over a hundred on the Chuang Tzu. I have not consulted all of them but have seen a good number although only the most important ones have been mentioned. It is the consultation of commentaries and recent studies that has made me differ from other translations in many places. In cases where alternate interpretations offered by different commentators seem to be of equal merit, I have indicated them in the footnotes.

  The third reason for a new translation is that many Chinese technical philosophical terms, especially those of Neo-Confucianism and Buddhism, require a new rendering. Until recently, there had not been sufficient tools to help the translator. Chinese dictionaries and encyclopedias are geared to Chinese literature, not philosophy, and many technical philosophical terms are not included. The publication of the monumental Daikanwa jiten (Great Chinese-Japanese Dictonary) in 1955-1960 has been a tremendous help to scholars. But even this great dictionary, with more than half a million terms, leaves some important philosophical terms out.3 Without adequate tools to help them, many translators have rendered technical terms in their popular meanings. Thus ching is often translated as “reverence,” which will do so far as its popular sense is concerned but not as a technical term in Neo-Confucianism.4 Unfortunately there are very few tools to help the translator on Neo-Confucian terms. The situation is much better in Buddhism, for excellent dictionaries do exist. But even these dictionaries are not complete. The entry cheng-chü, does not appear in them, for example. This term ordinarily means “proof,” but when one looks into commentaries on Buddhist texts, one finds it to have a special meaning “to show” or “to demonstrate.”

  Some Chinese terms are so complicated in meaning that there are no English equivalents for them and they therefore have to be transliterated. I have, however, kept these transliterations to a minimum. I prefer to have a term translated even though the translation may not be entirely satisfactory. More about these difficult translations will be said in the Appendix.

  I have used what I believe to be the best texts. In almost every text there are variations of individual words. These are noted only when the sense is seriously affected. And I have not noted obvious misprints or misplaced phrases. All titles have been translated. With the exception of some twelve cases, the sources of the 900-odd quotations have been given. Some sources are indicated in the original texts, but in most cases they had to be traced. Since for many of these there is no indication at all that they are quotations, and since indexes for most works are nonexistent, to find their origin is often like “fishing up a needle from the bottom of a sea,” as the common Chinese saying goes. But the identification of sources is necessary to show the reader the historical and philosophical connections between Chinese thinkers. It also enables him to check the context if he so desires. Those sayings or phrases that have already become established expressions are ordinarily no longer understood as quotations and there is therefore no need to trace their sources. In most cases where an English translation is available, a specific page reference is given to enable a comparison if desired.

  The order of chapters is not strictly chronological but grouped by schools within major periods, so as to give a better picture of the relation of schools. The translated materials in each chapter are, for the most part, arranged in their original order, with the original section or chapter numbers retained. Wherever the original order does not give a logical or well-rounded picture, however, selections are grouped under topics, with consecutive numbers assigned for easy reference.

  In many chapters a list of topics and references is given at the end of the introduction. These chapters are indicated by an asterisk at the end of their titles in the Table of Contents. Unless otherwise indicated, all footnotes and insertions in parentheses and brackets are mine. Brackets are intended for extraneous material while parentheses are for explanation and identification. But it is not always easy to draw the line.

  Except for some contemporaries who put their personal names before their family names (as I do), Chinese and Japanese names are given in the Chinese order, that is, with the family name first. Chinese and Japanese scholars are not consistent in using the various names of Chinese writers. Here the private names of philosophers, rather than their courtesy or literary names, are used, except in the cases of Lu Hsiang-shan and Wang Yang-ming, who are generally known in China, Japan, and the West by their honorific names. Wherever desirable, courtesy, literary, and other alternate names are given in parentheses to help identification. Chinese words and names are romanized according to the modified Wade-Giles system, save for well-known geographical and personal names which do not conform to it. Unnecessary diacritical marks, however, have been omitted. Dates of persons, if known, are provided in all cases except for those who are mentioned purely incidentally and for Western and contemporary Asian writers. The dates of Confucius, Mencius, Lao Tzu, and Chuang Tzu are given only in the chapters on them. The traditional Chinese calendar year is equated with its corresponding Western year, though the two do not exactly coincide. Thus 1525, for example, refers to the fourth year of the Chia-ching period. In China when a person is said to be fifty, for instance, it means he is in his fiftieth calendar year. I have followed this custom in referring to age.

  ▪ ▪ ▪--ACKNOWLEDGMENTS--▪ ▪ ▪

  It is difficult to say when the preparation of this book began. In 1948-1949 I was awarded a Guggenheim Fellowship to prepare an anthology on Neo-Confucianism. Part of the material has gone into Sources of Chinese Tradition which was compiled by Wm. Theodore de Bary, Burton Watson, and myself and published by Columbia University Press. The entire material now
forms part of this book. More work was done in 1955-1956 under a grant from the Rockefeller Foundation. Both Dr. Henry Allen Moe, Vice-President and Secretary-General of the John Simon Guggenheim Memorial Foundation, and Dr. Charles B. Fahs, former Director for the Humanities of the Rockefeller Foundation, have shown great interest and given strong encouragement, for which I am thankful.

  I wish also to thank the Harvard-Yenching Library and its Librarian, Dr. K’ai-ming A. Ch’iu, the East Asiatic Library of Columbia University and its Librarian, Mr. Howard P. Linton, the staff of Baker Library, especially its Reference Division, of Dartmouth College, and Miss Naomi Fukuda, Librarian of the International House of Japan, who has been most helpful in locating and microfilming Japanese works for me. The Ford Foundation, The Hazen Foundation, The Guggenheim Foundation, and The McInerny Foundation have generously made grants toward the publication of this book. I am deeply grateful to them. Needless to say, they are neither sponsors of the book nor responsible for its opinions, but their interest in promoting the study of Chinese philosophy is extremely encouraging. I am also grateful to the American Council of Learned Societies and the Social Science Research Council for a research grant in 1959 as well as to Dartmouth College for financial aid in preparing this book. To Columbia University Press I express my appreciation for its kind permission to use certain translations which I contributed to two of its publications, Sources of Chinese Tradition, already mentioned, and Instructions for Practical Living, and Other Neo-Confucian Writings by Wang Yang-ming, translated by myself. These translations form small parts of present chapters 19, 24, 26, 28-35. I have made some changes in them. Many friends have been keenly interested in this work and have provided much inspiration. I particularly appreciate the encouragement of Professor Edwin A. Burtt of Cornell University and Professor Alban G. Widgery of Duke University. My colleague Professor Arthur Dewing, whom I have interrupted many a time, has been most patient and sympathetic in answering my queries on English usage. Professor Kenneth K. S. Ch’en of Princeton University has given me valuable help on many Sanskrit words, as have Professor Yuen Ren Chao of the University of California, Professor Tien-yi Li of Yale, and Professors William Hung and Lien-sheng Yang of Harvard on certain Chinese words and expressions. Mrs. Alice W. Weymouth was most helpful in typing the manuscript, which I sincerely appreciate. To Princeton University Press and its Director and Editor, Mr. Herbert S. Bailey, Jr., I wish to express my thanks for their generous aid and effort in the publication of this work, including a substantial contribution from the Press’s university press publication fund. Mrs. James Holly Hanford, of Princeton University Press, has given me great help on the arrangement and literary expression of the work.