A Concise Companion to Confucius E-Book

• Herausgeber: John Wiley & Sons
• Kategorie: Geisteswissenschaft
• Serie: Blackwell Companions to Philosophy
• Sprache: Englisch

Seitenzahl: 1048

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2017

Beschreibung

This authoritative collection surveys the teachings of Confucius, and illustrates his importance throughout Chinese history in one focused and incisive volume.

A Concise Companion to Confucius offers a succinct introduction to one of East Asia’s most widely-revered historical figures, providing essential coverage of his legacy at a manageable length. The volume embraces Confucius as philosopher, teacher, politician, and sage, and curates a collection of key perspectives on his life and teachings from a team of distinguished scholars in philosophy, history, religious studies, and the history of art. Taken together, chapters encourage specialists to read across disciplinary boundaries, provide nuanced paths of introduction for students, and engage interested readers who want to expand their understanding of the great Chinese master.

Divided into four distinct sections, the Concise Companion depicts a coherent figure of Confucius by examining his diverse representations from antiquity through to the modern world. Readers are guided through the intellectual and cultural influences that helped shape the development of Confucian philosophy and its reception among late imperial literati in medieval China. Later essays consider Confucius’s engagement with topics such as warfare, women, and Western philosophy, which remain fruitful avenues of philosophical inquiry today. The collection concludes by exploring the significance of Confucian thought in East Asia’s contemporary landscape and the major intellectual movements which are reviving and rethinking his work for the twenty-first century.

An indispensable resource, A Concise Companion to Confucius blazes an authoritative trail through centuries of scholarship to offer exceptional insight into one of history’s earliest and most influential ancient philosophers.

A Concise Companion to Confucius:

• Provides readers with a broad range of perspectives on the ancient philosopher
• Traces the significance of Confucius throughout Chinese history—past, present, and future
• Offers a unique, interdisciplinary overview of Confucianism
• Curated by a team of distinguished scholars in philosophy, history, religious studies, and the history of art

A Concise Companion to Confucius is an ideal text for undergraduate and graduate courses on Confucius and Confucianism. It is also fascinating and informative reading for anyone interested in learning more about one of history’s most influential philosophers.

Leseprobe

Table of Contents

Cover

Title Page

Notes on Contributors

Introduction

References

Part I: Representations of Confucius

1 Early Sources for Confucius

The Sources

The Challenges Therein

The

Lunyu

The Kongzi Problem

References

2 Confucius in Excavated Warring States Manuscripts

Confucius in the Guodian Manuscripts

Confucius in the Shanghai Museum Manuscripts

References

3 The Unorthodox Master

The Debate about Milfoil Divination and the

Changes

in the “Yao” 要 Manuscript

Foreknowledge and the Status of Master

Apocrypha, Prognostication Manuals, and Records of the Strange

Conclusion

References

4 Representations of Confucius in Apocrypha of the First Century CE

Apocrypha and its History

The Image of Confucius at the End of Western Han

Confucius as a Prophet

Confucius’ Authorship of the

Annals

in Apocrypha

Confucius and Bizarre Phenomena

The Heavenly Sage: Confucius’ Human and Miraculous Birth

Concluding Remarks

References

5 Visual Representations of Confucius

Serial Pictures of the Life of Confucius

References

Part II: Confucian Ideas

6

Le

in the

Analects

Introduction

Use of

Le

in Early Texts: Preliminary Observations

Le 樂and

Xi

喜

Le

and Music:

Le

樂,

An

安

, He

和

, Wang

忘

Le

as an Idealized State of Mind:

Le

樂 and

Dao

道

Le

as an Idealized State of Mind:

Le

樂 and

You

憂

References

7 Women in the

Analects

References

8 Confucius’ Elitism

Background: Noble and Petty Men of the Aristocratic Age

The

Analects

:

Shi

as Noble Men

Noble versus Petty Men: Social and Ethical Hierarchies

After Confucius: Who is a Real

junzi

?

Epilogue: Flexible Hierarchy as a Remedy to Excessive Equality?

References

9 Confucius and Filial Piety

The Roots of Filial Piety

Death, Rituals, and Death Rituals

Filial Piety as Expression and Concealment

Filial Piety and Remonstration

Filial Piety, Self‐Cultivation, and Government

Conclusion

References

10 The Gentleman’s Views on Warfare According to the

Gongyang Commentary

Introduction

Vengeful Warfare

Punitive Expeditions

Rescue Missions (

jiu

救)

Decorous Warfare (

li

禮 and

xin

信)

Conclusion: Reading Confucius as a Pacifist

References

11 Comparisons with Western Philosophy

Why is Comparative Philosophy Worthwhile?

Challenges in the Study of Confucianism and Western Philosophy

References

Part III: The Legacy of Confucius in Imperial China

12 From Uncrowned King to the Sage of Profound Greatness

Understanding “Sageness”

Nature and Capacity

The Heart and Mind of the Sage

Lunyu

Learning

References

13 The Reception of

The Classic of Filial Piety

from Medieval to Late Imperial China

Gendered Reading: Chinese Biographical Sources

The Classic of Filial Piety

and Female Education

References to

The Classic of Filial Piety

in Epitaphs

The Classic of Filial Piety

and its Male Audience

The Revival of

The Classic of Filial Piety

from late Ming to the Qing Dynasty

Concluding Remarks

References

14 Kongzi as the Uncrowned King in some Qing Gongyang Exegeses

References

Part IV: Confucius and New Confucianisms in Modern East Asia

15 Confucianism, Capitalism, and Shibusawa Eiichi’s

The Analects and the Abacus

Biographical Sketch

An Interpretation of the Life of Viscount Shibusawa

Confucius

The Analects and the Abacus

Bushidō

Christianity

China

Concluding Observations

References

16 Confucius in the May Fourth Era

References

17 New Confucianism

First Generation: Confucians against the Currents

The Second Generation: Confucians in Hong Kong and Taiwan

The Third Generation: Overseas Confucians

Conclusion

References

Index

End User License Agreement

List of Tables

Chapter 04

Table 4.1 Succession by Generation 相生

List of Illustrations

Chapter 05

Figure 5.1 Portrait of Confucius, the Foremost Teacher, Practicing the Teaching (Xianshi Kongzi xingjiao xiang 先師孔子行教像), with attribution to Wu Daozi.

Figure 5.2 Riding in a Carriage (Cheng lu 乘輅 (

Confucius and Ten Disciples

)), detail. Jin‐Yuan period, thirteenth century. Woodblock‐printed illustration in Kong Yuancuo. Kongshi zuting guangji 孔氏祖庭廣記 (Expanded Records of the Kong Lineage) (Qufu: n.p., 1242), tuben 圖本 3. National Library of China, Beijing.

Figure 5.3 Portrait of Confucius, Ultimate Sage of Great Completion and Foremost Teacher of Exalted Culture (Dacheng zhisheng wenxuan xianshi Kongzi zhi xiang 大成至聖文宣先師孔子之像). Qing period, 1673. Woodblock‐printed illustration in Song Ji 宋際 and Song Qingchang 宋慶長, comps.

Queli guangzhi

闕里廣誌 (

Expanded Gazetteer of Queli

). Qufu: n.p., 1673, 1.3a.

Figure 5.4 Confucius meets Laozi and Xiang Tuo, detail. Eastern Han period, second century. Rubbing of stone carved in bas relief. Shandong Provincial Museum.

Figure 5.5 Votive figurine of Confucius, allegedly carved by disciple Zi Gong 子貢. Date uncertain. Wood with traces of pigment. Formerly in the Southern Kong Family Temple, Quzhou, Zhejiang. Cultural Relics Administrative Committee of Qufu, Shandong.

Figure 5.6 The

Small Portrait

(Xiao ying 小影 (

Confucius and Yan Hui

)). Northern Song period, 1118. Rubbing of incised stone tablet erected by Kong Yu 孔瑀 in the Temple of Confucius, Qufu, Shandong.

Figure 5.7 The

Small Portrait

(Xiao ying 小影 (

Confucius and Yan Hui

)), with attribution to Wu Daozi. Ming period, 1563. Rubbing of incised stone tablet erected by Sun Ying’ao 孫應鰲 at the the Xi’an prefectural school.

Figure 5.8 Confucius and ten disciples, with attribution to Wu Daozi. Northern Song period, 1095. Rubbing of incised stone tablet erected by Kong Zongshou 孔宗壽 in the Temple of Confucius, Qufu, Shandong.

Figure 5.9 Portrait of Confucius, copied from Song Gaozong’s

Portraits and Eulogies of Confucius and Seventy‐two Disciples

(1156). Qing period, nineteenth century. Woodblock‐printed illustration in Gu Yuan (1826, 1.1b).

Figure 5.10 Left‐behind Portrait of the Exalted Sage (

Xuansheng yixiang

宣聖遺像), with attribution to Wu Daozi. Ming period, 1560. Rubbing of incised stone tablet erected by Wu Weiye 吳偉業 in the prefectural school of Jinan, Shandong

Figure 5.11 “Standard Portrait” of Confucius (Kongzi biaozhun xiang 孔子標準像), 2006. Bronze statue erected in Qufu, Shandong by the China Confucius Foundation.

Figure 5.12 Confucius and disciples at the Apricot Altar (Xing tan 杏壇). Southern Song period, thirteenth century. Woodblock‐printed illustration in Kong Chuan 孔傳, Dongjia zaji 東家雜記 (Miscellaneous Records of the Eastern House) (n.p., 1134, with additions), frontispiece.

Figure 5.13 Confucius’ make [of zither] (Kongzi zhi zhi 孔子之制), from the album

Styles of Zithers through the Ages

(

Lidai qinshi tu

歷代琴式圖). Artist and date unknown. Painting in ink on paper.

Figure 5.14 Portrait of Confucius, Ultimate Sage and Foremost Teacher (

Zhisheng xianshi xiang

至聖先師像), by Prince Guo, Yunli (果親王, 允禮, 1697–1738). Qing period, 1734. Rubbing of incised stone tablet in the Stele Forest (Beilin 碑林), Xian.

Figure 5.15 Portrait of [Confucius as] the Minister of Justice (

Sikou xiang

司寇像). Qing period, 1673. Woodblock‐printed illustration in Song and Song ([1673] 1870), 1.4a.

Figure 5.16 Cum Fu Çu, sive Confucius. 1687. Engraving in Intorcetta et al. (1687, 12: cxvii).

Figure 5.17 Confucius endangered in Song 宋, from

Traces of the Sage Confucius

(

Kongzi Shengji tu

孔子聖蹟圖). Qing period, 1682. Rubbing from stone tablet in Suzhou, copied from Zhang Kai’s 張楷 fifteenth‐century original. Musée Guimet Library.

Figure 5.18 “Classics Completed, Bestowing Jade” (

Jing cheng xi huang

經成錫璜), from

Pictures of the Traces of the Sage

(

Shengji tu

聖蹟圖). Qing period, 1826. Woodblock‐printed illustration in Gu Yuan (1826, app., 59b).

Figure 5.19 “Composing (the song) ‘Oh! The Orchid’” (

Zuo “Yi lancao

” 作猗蘭操), from

Pictures of the Traces of the Sage

(

Shengji zhi tu

聖蹟之圖). Ming or Qing period, seventeenth century. Woodblock‐printed illustration of incised stone tablet in the Temple of Confucius.

Figure 5.20 Confucius advises the ruler of Chen, 1788. Engraving in Helman (1788, pl. 18).

Figure 5.21 Portrait of Confucius (

Kongzi xiang

孔子像), 1905. Illustration in

Guocui xuebao

國粹學報 (

National Essence Journal

), 1905, vol. 1(1).

Figure 5.22 Wu Daozi’s Portrait of Confucius (

Wu Daozi hua Kongzi xiang

吳道子畫孔子像), 1906. Illustration in

Guocui xuebao

國粹學報 (

National Essence Journal

), 1906, vol. 2(1).

Figure 5.23 Sacrificial assembly in the holy temple (

Shengmiao sidian

聖廟祀典), 1913. Illustration in

Kongjiao hui zazhi

孔敎會雜誌 (

Magazine of the Confucius Religion Association

), 1913, vol. 1(1), pl. 4.

Figure 5.24 Confucius and four disciples, twentieth century. Color woodcut votive print (nianhua).

Figure 5.25 Confucius endangered in Song 宋, from

The Evil Life of Confucius

(

Kong Lao’er zui e de yi sheng

孔老二罪惡的一生), 1974. Cultural Revolution cartoon booklet.

Figure 5.26 Statue of Confucius outside the library of the National Palace Museum, Taiwan. 1974.

Figure 5.27 Statue of Confucius at Nishan 尼山, near Qufu, Shandong, 2016.

Figure 5.28 Statue of Confucius in a courtyard at the National Museum of China, Beijing, 2011.

Guide

Cover

Table of Contents

Begin Reading

Pages

ii

iii

iv

vii

viii

ix

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

92

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

100

101

102

103

104

105

106

107

108

109

110

111

112

113

114

115

116

117

118

119

120

121

122

123

124

125

126

127

128

129

131

133

134

135

136

137

138

139

140

141

142

143

144

145

146

147

148

149

150

151

152

153

154

155

156

157

158

159

160

161

162

163

164

165

166

167

168

169

170

171

172

173

174

175

176

177

178

179

180

181

182

183

184

185

186

187

188

189

190

191

192

193

194

195

196

197

198

199

200

201

202

203

204

205

206

207

208

209

210

211

212

213

214

215

216

217

218

219

220

221

222

223

224

225

226

227

228

229

230

231

232

233

234

235

236

237

238

239

240

241

242

243

244

245

246

247

249

250

251

252

253

254

255

256

257

258

259

260

261

262

263

264

265

266

267

268

269

270

271

272

273

274

275

276

277

278

279

280

281

282

283

284

285

286

287

288

289

290

291

292

293

294

295

296

297

298

299

300

301

302

303

305

307

308

309

310

311

312

313

314

315

316

317

318

319

320

321

322

323

324

325

326

327

328

329

330

331

332

333

334

335

336

337

338

339

340

341

342

343

344

345

346

347

348

349

350

351

352

353

354

355

356

357

358

359

360

361

362

363

364

365

366

367

368

369

370

371

372

373

374

375

376

377

378

379

380

381

382

383

384

385

386

387

388

389

390

391

392

393

394

395

396

397

398

Blackwell Companions to Philosophy

This outstanding student reference series offers a comprehensive and authoritative survey of philosophy as a whole. Written by today’s leading philosophers, each volume provides lucid and engaging coverage of the key figures, terms, topics, and problems of the field. Taken together, the volumes provide the ideal basis for course use, representing an unparalleled work of reference for students and specialists alike.

Already published in the series:

The Blackwell Companion to Philosophy, Second Edition

Edited by Nicholas Bunnin and Eric Tsui‐James

A Companion to Ethics

Edited by Peter Singer

A Companion to Aesthetics, Second Edition

Edited by Stephen Davies, Kathleen Marie Higgins, Robert Hopkins, Robert Stecker, and David E. Cooper

A Companion to Epistemology, Second Edition

Edited by Jonathan Dancy, Ernest Sosa, and Matthias Steup

A Companion to Contemporary Political Philosophy (two‐volume set), Second Edition

Edited by Robert E. Goodin and Philip Pettit

A Companion to Philosophy of Mind

Edited by Samuel Guttenplan

A Companion to Metaphysics, Second Edition

Edited by Jaegwon Kim, Ernest Sosa, and Gary S. Rosenkrantz

A Companion to Philosophy of Law and Legal Theory, Second Edition

Edited by Dennis Patterson

A Companion to Philosophy of Religion, Second Edition

Edited by Charles Taliaferro, Paul Draper, and Philip L. Quinn

A Companion to the Philosophy of Language

Edited by Bob Hale and Crispin Wright

A Companion to World Philosophies

Edited by Eliot Deutsch and Ron Bontekoe

A Companion to Continental Philosophy

Edited by Simon Critchley and William Schroeder

A Companion to Feminist Philosophy

Edited by Alison M. Jaggar and Iris Marion Young

A Companion to Cognitive Science

Edited by William Bechtel and George Graham

A Companion to Bioethics, Second Edition

Edited by Helga Kuhse and Peter Singer

A Companion to the Philosophers

Edited by Robert L. Arrington

A Companion to Business Ethics

Edited by Robert E. Frederick

A Companion to the Philosophy of Science

Edited by W. H. Newton‐Smith

A Companion to Environmental Philosophy

Edited by Dale Jamieson

A Companion to Analytic Philosophy

Edited by A. P. Martinich and David Sosa

A Companion to Genethics

Edited by Justine Burley and John Harris

A Companion to Philosophical Logic

Edited by Dale Jacquette

A Companion to Early Modern Philosophy

Edited by Steven Nadler

A Companion to Philosophy in the Middle Ages

Edited by Jorge J. E. Gracia and Timothy B. Noone

A Companion to African‐American Philosophy

Edited by Tommy L. Lott and John P. Pittman

A Companion to Applied Ethics

Edited by R. G. Frey and Christopher Heath Wellman

A Companion to the Philosophy of Education

Edited by Randall Curren

A Companion to African Philosophy

Edited by Kwasi Wiredu

A Companion to Heidegger

Edited by Hubert L. Dreyfus and Mark A. Wrathall

A Companion to Rationalism

Edited by Alan Nelson

A Companion to Pragmatism

Edited by John R. Shook and Joseph Margolis

A Companion to Ancient Philosophy

Edited by Mary Louise Gill and Pierre Pellegrin

A Companion to Nietzsche

Edited by Keith Ansell Pearson

A Companion to Socrates

Edited by Sara Ahbel‐Rappe and Rachana Kamtekar

A Companion to Phenomenology and Existentialism

Edited by Hubert L. Dreyfus and Mark A. Wrathall

A Companion to Kant

Edited by Graham Bird

A Companion to Plato

Edited by Hugh H. Benson

A Companion to Descartes

Edited by Janet Broughton and John Carriero

A Companion to the Philosophy of Biology

Edited by Sahotra Sarkar and Anya Plutynski

A Companion to Hume

Edited by Elizabeth S. Radcliffe

A Companion to the Philosophy of History and Historiography

Edited by Aviezer Tucker

A Companion to Aristotle

Edited by Georgios Anagnostopoulos

A Companion to the Philosophy of Technology

Edited by Jan‐Kyrre Berg Olsen, Stig Andur Pedersen, and Vincent F. Hendricks

A Companion to Latin American Philosophy

Edited by Susana Nuccetelli, Ofelia Schutte, and Otávio Bueno

A Companion to the Philosophy of Literature

Edited by Garry L. Hagberg and Walter Jost

A Companion to the Philosophy of Action

Edited by Timothy O’Connor and Constantine Sandis

A Companion to Relativism

Edited by Steven D. Hales

A Companion to Hegel

Edited by Stephen Houlgate and Michael Baur

A Companion to Schopenhauer

Edited by Bart Vandenabeele

A Companion to Buddhist Philosophy

Edited by Steven M. Emmanuel

A Companion to Foucault

Edited by Christopher Falzon, Timothy O’Leary, and Jana Sawicki

A Companion to the Philosophy of Time

Edited by Heather Dyke and Adrian Bardon

A Companion to Donald Davidson

Edited by Ernest Lepore and Kirk Ludwig

A Companion to Rawls

Edited by Jon Mandle and David Reidy

A Companion to W. V. O Quine

Edited by Gilbert Harman and Ernest Lepore

A Companion to Derrida

Edited by Zeynep Direk and Leonard Lawlor

A Companion to David Lewis

Edited by Barry Loewer and Jonathan Schaffer

A Companion to Kierkegaard

Edited by Jon Stewart

A Companion to Locke

Edited by Matthew Stuart

The Blackwell Companion to Hermeneutics

Edited by Niall Keane and Chris Lawn

A Companion to Ayn Rand

Edited by Allan Gotthelf and Gregory Salmieri

The Blackwell Companion to Naturalism

Edited by Kelly James Clark

A Companion to the Philosophy of Language (two‐volume set), Second Edition

Edited by Bob Hale

A Companion to Mill

Edited by Christopher Macleod and Dale E. Miller

A Concise Companion to Confucius

Edited by Paul R. Goldin

A Concise Companion to Confucius

Edited byPaul R. Goldin

This edition first published 2017© 2017 John Wiley & Sons Ltd

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, except as permitted by law. Advice on how to obtain permission to reuse material from this title is available at http://www.wiley.com/go/permissions.

The right of Paul R. Goldin to be identified as the author of the editorial material in this work has been asserted in accordance with law.

Registered OfficesJohn Wiley & Sons, Inc., 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030, USAJohn Wiley & Sons Ltd, The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 8SQ, UK

Editorial Office9600 Garsington Road, Oxford, OX4 2DQ, UK

For details of our global editorial offices, customer services, and more information about Wiley products visit us at www.wiley.com.

Wiley also publishes its books in a variety of electronic formats and by print‐on‐demand. Some content that appears in standard print versions of this book may not be available in other formats.

Limit of Liability/Disclaimer of WarrantyWhile the publisher and authors have used their best efforts in preparing this work, they make no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents of this work and specifically disclaim all warranties, including without limitation any implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. No warranty may be created or extended by sales representatives, written sales materials or promotional statements for this work. The fact that an organization, website, or product is referred to in this work as a citation and/or potential source of further information does not mean that the publisher and authors endorse the information or services the organization, website, or product may provide or recommendations it may make. This work is sold with the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering professional services. The advice and strategies contained herein may not be suitable for your situation. You should consult with a specialist where appropriate. Further, readers should be aware that websites listed in this work may have changed or disappeared between when this work was written and when it is read. Neither the publisher nor authors shall be liable for any loss of profit or any other commercial damages, including but not limited to special, incidental, consequential, or other damages.

Library of Congress Cataloging‐in‐Publication Data

Name: Goldin, Paul Rakita, 1972– editor.Title: A concise companion to Confucius / edited by Paul R. Goldin, University of Pennsylvania, US.Description: First edition. | Hoboken : Wiley, 2017. | Series: Blackwellcompanions to philosophy | Includes bibliographical references and index.Identifiers: LCCN 2017011112 (print) | LCCN 2017016879 (ebook) | ISBN 9781118783870 (cloth) | ISBN 9781118783849 (pdf) | ISBN 9781118783832 (epub)Subjects: LCSH: Confucius. | Confucianism. | Philosophy, Confucian.Classification: LCC B128.C8 (ebook) | LCC B128.C8 C573 2017 (print) | DDC181/.112–dc23LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2017011112

Cover image: © Shiwei/GettyimagesCover design by Wiley

Notes on Contributors

Alan K. L. Chan is Professor of Humanities and Dean of the College of Humanities, Arts, and Social Sciences at Nanyang Technological University, Singapore. With research interests in both Confucianism and Daoism, he is a founding editorial board member of Oxford Bibliographies: Chinese Studies. His MOOC, “Explorations in Confucian Philosophy,” will soon be launched on Coursera.

Erin M. Cline is Associate Professor of Comparative Ethics in the Department of Theology at Georgetown University, where she teaches Chinese and Comparative Philosophy and Religion. She is the author of Confucius, Rawls, and the Sense of Justice (2013) and Families of Virtue: Confucian and Western Views on Childhood Development (2015).

Scott Cook 顧史考 is Tan Chin Tuan Professor of Chinese Studies at Yale–NUS College in Singapore. His works include The Bamboo Texts of Guodian: A Study and Complete Translation (2012) and Guodian Chujian xian‐Qin rushu hongweiguan 郭店楚簡先秦儒書宏微觀 (2006), among others.

Paul R. Goldin is Professor of East Asian Languages & Civilizations at the University of Pennsylvania. He is the author of Rituals of the Way: The Philosophy of Xunzi (1999); The Culture of Sex in Ancient China (2002); After Confucius: Studies in Early Chinese Philosophy (2005); and Confucianism (2011). In addition, he has edited the revised edition of R.H. van Gulik's classic study, Sexual Life in Ancient China (2003), and has co‐edited three other books on Chinese culture and political philosophy.

Yong Huang is Professor of Philosophy at the Chinese University of Hong Kong. He is the editor of Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy and Dao Companions to Chinese Philosophy (a book series). His research interests include ethics, political philosophy, and Chinese and comparative philosophy.

Michael Hunter is an Assistant Professor of East Asian Languages and Literatures at Yale University. He received his PhD from Princeton University’s Department of East Asian Studies.

Anne Behnke Kinney is Professor of Chinese in the Department of East Asian Languages, Literatures, and Cultures at the University of Virginia. Her publications include Representations of Childhood and Youth in Early China and Exemplary Women of Early China: The Lienü zhuan of Liu Xiang.

Miaw‐fen Lu is a Research Fellow in the Institute of Modern History, Academia Sinica. Her major research interests lie in intellectual and cultural history in late imperial China. She is the author of The Wang Yangming School during the Ming Dynasty and Ruling All under Heaven with Filial Piety (both in Chinese).

Zhao Lu is Research Fellow on the project “Fate, Freedom, and Prognostication: Strategies for Coping with the Future in East Asia and Europe” at the International Consortium for Research in the Humanities, Friedrich‐Alexander‐University, Erlangen‐Nuremberg, Germany. His research focuses on the images of Confucius and classicism in early imperial China.

Julia K. Murray is Professor Emerita of Art History, East Asian Studies, and Religious Studies at the University of Wisconsin and is affiliated with the Fairbank Center at Harvard University. She has published extensively on visual and material culture associated with the worship of Confucius and on Chinese narrative illustration.

On‐cho Ng is Professor of History, Asian Studies, and Philosophy at Pennsylvania State

University, where he also heads the Department of Asian Studies. His many publications address a variety of topics, including late imperial Chinese intellectual history, and Confucian historiography, hermeneutics, religiousness, and ethics.

Yuri Pines, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, focuses on early Chinese political thought and traditional Chinese political culture. Among his publications are Foundations of Confucian Thought (2002), Envisioning Eternal Empire (2009), The Everlasting Empire (2012), and translation and study of The Book of Lord Shang (2017).

Sarah A. Queen is Professor of History at Connecticut College. She is the author of From Chronicle to Canon, co‐translator with John S. Major, of Luxuriant Gems of the Spring and Autumn, and co‐editor with Paul van Els, of Between History and Philosophy: Anecdotes in Early China.

Thomas Radice is Associate Professor of History at Southern Connecticut State University, specializing in early Chinese intellectual history. He has published articles and book reviews in Asian Philosophy, Dao, and Sino‐Platonic Papers, and is currently working on a book manuscript about ritual performance in early Chinese thought.

Kwong‐loi Shun teaches philosophy at the University of California, Berkeley. His main research interests are moral psychology and Confucian thought. He has been working on a multivolume work on Confucian thought, and the first volume, Mencius and Early Chinese Thought, was published in 1997. He has been Professor of Philosophy and a university administrator at the University of California Berkeley, University of Toronto, and the Chinese University of Hong Kong.

John A. Tucker is Professor of History at East Carolina University in Greenville, North Carolina. His research focuses on Tokugawa Confucianism, as well as ways in which Tokugawa Confucianism and its philosophical byproducts surfaced in later Japanese history. Tucker is the author of a translation study of Itō Jinsai’s Gomō jigi (1998) and Ogyū Sorai’s Bendō and Benmei (2006). He edited Critical Readings on Japanese Confucianism (2012); and co‐edited, with Chun‐chieh Huang, Dao Companion to Japanese Confucian Philosophy (2014).

Q. Edward Wang is Professor of History at Rowan University and Changjiang Professor at Peking University (2007–present). Among his publications are Inventing China through History: the May Fourth Approach to Historiography and Chopsticks: A Cultural and Culinary History. He also serves as editor of Chinese Studies in History.

Oliver Weingarten, PhD (Cantab), is Research Fellow at the Oriental Institute of the Czech Academy of Sciences, Prague. He has published on textual traditions and the intellectual history of the pre‐imperial era in the Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, the Journal of the American Oriental Society, the Bulletin of the School or Oriental and African Studies, and the Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society. His current research focuses on two topics: courage, confrontation and violence in early China, and textual structures, especially potential mnemonic features, of early Chinese writings.

Introduction: Confucius and Confucianism

PAUL R. GOLDIN

Confucius is a Latinization of the Chinese name Kongfuzi 孔夫子, meaning Gentleman or Master Kong (traditional dates: 551–479 BC). Throughout East Asia, he has always been more commonly called Kongzi 孔子, but his status as the premier teacher in the Chinese tradition was crucial to the Jesuits who popularized the Latinized name, and thus they seem to have preferred the even more august locution Kongfuzi (Standaert 1999, 123–27). The accommodationist strategy of Matteo Ricci (1552–1610) and other Jesuit missionaries was to declare Confucius’ teachings, as well as the tradition on which they rested, as fundamentally congruent with Christianity (e.g., Mungello 1985; Rule 1986, 10–69). One key piece of evidence for Jesuit readers was the presence of multiple variants of the Golden Rule in Confucian texts, such as “Do not impose on others what you yourself do not desire” 己所不欲, 勿施於人 (Analects 12.2). This was naturally compared to Matthew 7:12: “Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them.”

The Jesuit interpretation of Confucianism was well intentioned, but misleading in several respects. For example, while Ricci advanced Confucius as the most authentic and praiseworthy embodiment of Chinese wisdom, he denigrated many other traditions, including not only organized religions like Buddhism and Daoism, but also popular practices such as divination, as vulgar superstition (Ricci 1953, 82–105). This has led to the unproductive analytical habit, sometimes discernible even in today’s scholarship, of equating all aspects of Chinese culture with Confucianism, which not only overstates the role of Confucian teachings in the organization of Chinese society (e.g., Goldin 2011, 2–4), but has also contributed to a lack of appreciation of other philosophical and religious movements.

Nevertheless, most Chinese literati in Ricci’s day would have agreed that Confucius was the most important of their many cultural forebears. One of Confucius’ many Chinese appellations is xianshi 先師, a powerful term meaning both “former teacher” and “foremost teacher.” Confucius was similarly venerated in other East Asian cultures influenced by Chinese examples, such as Korea, Japan, and Vietnam (even as they recognized, more readily than Ricci, that other traditions were worthy of respect as well).

What did Confucius accomplish that warranted such immense and institutionalized praise? The title xianshi offers a good preliminary basis for an answer: he was regarded as first among teachers. He was assuredly not the first teacher in any literal sense, for the cultic rituals of the Bronze Age (manifested by complex assemblages of ritual bronze vessels that were hoarded by leading lineages and interred with prominent men and women upon their deaths) must have required instructors to insure that the ceremonies were properly performed and the finical spirits duly appeased. Over time, it seems, such ritual masters started to include moral and political lessons in their curriculum. For example, in a scene set in 662 BC,1 occasioned by the appearance of a spirit in a place called Guó 虢, two ritual officers are said to have predicted the demise of that state because its ruler “listens to spirits” instead of “listening to his populace,” as an enlightened sovereign would (Yang Bojun 1990, 1.251–53; cf. Xu Yuangao 2002, 28–31). Hardly anything else is ever said about these two officers;2 we must surmise that they were masters who would be consulted when the government required an expert opinion on ritual affairs. Their statement that the ruler must above all heed his people suggests an underlying political philosophy that charges the ruler with safeguarding the welfare of his subjects (Pines 2002, 78), and may even anticipate Confucius’ humanistic view that spirits do not offer useful moral guidance (Goldin 2011, 13 f.). Another ritual master, Scribe Lao 史老 (fleetingly attested in Xu Yuangao 2002, 502), an advisor of King Ling of Chu 楚靈王 (r. 540–529 BC), may be the dimly remembered historical figure who inspired the world‐famous text Laozi 老子.3

Confucius is the first such master for whom we have substantial evidence of the content his teachings. Remembering that he lived over 2,500 years ago, however, we should not be surprised that the sources leave many open questions. The foremost text purporting to record his teachings is the so‐called Analects (the Jesuit translation of Lunyu 論語, meaning Selected Sayings), which was supposedly compiled after Confucius’ death by his disciples – or perhaps disciples of disciples, since some of Confucius’ disciples are identified in the text as masters in their own right. Strangely, however, there is no record of the Analects until centuries later (e.g., Makeham 1996). Michael Hunter, in Chapter 1 of this volume, discusses the interpretive consequences lucidly; my view (Goldin forthcoming) is that that whoever was responsible for compiling the Analects included an overwhelming proportion of genuine material within it, but at a minimum modern readers must bear in mind that they are not reading the work of Confucius himself – that is to say, the Confucius we are given to see in the Analects is the Confucius that some posterior committee wanted us to see. To muddy the waters further, sayings and conversations are often presented with scant context. Reconstructing a coherent philosophy out of such fragmentary material requires considerable creativity. Nor are we alone in this quandary: the varied interpretations of Confucius’ philosophy even in antiquity indicate that there was no authorized ideology shared by all Confucians.4

Of Confucius’ life and heritage we know only the barest of details,5 especially after eliminating the eager hagiographies that emerged in the centuries after his death.6In reality, his ancestry was murky (Eno 2003); his father, called Shuliang He 叔梁梁 in most sources, may have been a warrior from a place called Zou 陬/鄒. The highlights of his career, according to tradition, were serving his home state of Lu 魯 as Minister of Justice (sikou 司寇) and attracting dozens of disciples, some of whom were among the social elite. Latter‐day Confucians regarded the position of Minister of Justice as incommensurate with Confucius’ prodigious gifts, and were at pains to explain his failure to achieve more. Sometimes posterity called him “the uncrowned king” (suwang 素王), alluding to the rank that he should have attained (see Alan K. L. Chan, Chapter 12, and On‐cho Ng, Chapter 14, this volume). Passages in the Analects (e.g., 16.13), similarly, hint at unseemly discord in his household, and it is suggestive that more is known about his grandson, the philosopher Zisi 子思 (483?–402), than his ne’er‐do‐well son, Boyu 伯魚 (532–483). Confucius died in his seventies, perhaps with a sense of a mission unfulfilled.

As presented in the Analects, Confucius’ philosophy begins with the premise that one must think for oneself. Confucius continually deconstructs received religion and enjoins his disciples to think through a new moral system with human interaction as its base.

Fan Chi 樊遲 [b. 515 BC] asked about wisdom. The Master said: “To take righteousness among the people as one’s duty, and to revere the ghosts and spirits, but keep them at a distance, can be called wisdom.”

(Analects 6.20)

Confucius is not an atheist– he concedes that there are ghosts and spirits, and that it is advisable not to offend them – but he believes that pondering the afterlife and the supernatural will only impede moral reasoning (Analects 11.11).

And how does one instill “righteousness among the people”? Here the Golden Rule, admired by Ricci, comes into play: “What you yourself do not desire, do not do to others” (Analects 15.23; cf. also 5.11). This is presented as Confucius’ own definition of shu 恕, “reciprocity.” Sometimes it is called the Silver Rule, so as to distinguish it from the Judeo‐Christian Golden Rule, because it is formulated in the negative (cf. Huang 2005, 394). Another qualification is necessary: in practice, shu has to be interpreted as doing unto others as you would have others do unto you if you had the same social role as they (Nussbaum 2003, 6; Goldin 2005, 1–4). Shu is a relation not between two individuated people, but between two social roles. How does one treat one’s father, to take a typical Confucian example? In the same way that one would want to be treated by one’s son if one were a father oneself. Moreover, whether formulated as the Golden or the Silver Rule, Confucius’ principle is open to the same doubts that Alan Gewirth (1981) has raised with reference to the Western tradition (see also Ivanhoe 2008).

In Analects 15.23, Confucius identifies shu as “the one word that one can practice throughout one’s life” (cf. also 4.15 and 15.2), and in 6.28 he defines a paraphrase of shu as “the method of humanity,” or ren 仁, which he regarded as the cardinal virtue. Considering how reluctant he is elsewhere to define ren, we must apperceive this is a very big hint: the way to become a “humane” person starts with the moral reasoning entailed by shu, that is, asking ourselves in each particular situation how we ought to treat other people by imagining ourselves in their shoes and thinking through our relationship to them. Another big hint comes in Analects 12.1, where Confucius responds to a question about ren by saying: “Overcome the self and return to ritual in order to practice humanity.” When the disciple presses Confucius further, he says:

Do not look in opposition to the rites. Do not listen in opposition to the rites. Do not speak in opposition to the rites. Do not move in opposition to the rites.

Western interpreters of Confucius (such as Fingarette 1972) have frequently mischaracterized “the rites” (li 禮) as something like a code of conduct, leading to serious misconceptions about what Confucius means here by not looking, listening, speaking, or moving in opposition to the rites. One might think there is a discrete and knowable code, called li, on which one can rely for guidance in all matters: if you do not know how to act, cleave to the li, and you will never be wrong. This might even have been the standard conception of li in Confucius’ own day: a practicable code that ambitious young men hoped to learn from experienced ritual masters. The problem is that this understanding of li is inadequate for Confucius, because he explicitly contrasts the rites with anything like a predetermined code (and, to this extent, the very translation of li as “rite” or “ritual” can be misleading). In Analects 2.3, for example, Confucius states that laws and punishments are inferior to virtue and ritual because although the former can be effective at molding behavior, they do not cause people to reflect on their conduct and develop a conscience (chi 恥, sometimes translated as “shame”). As a philosopher who values moral reasoning above all else, Confucius is wary of anything like a code that one could cheat oneself into practicing unthinkingly and automatically.

Other comments on li are in the same spirit. The most revealing passage has to do with rituals in a ceremonial hall (Analects 9.3): the contemporary habit of replacing a prescribed linen hat with one of cheaper silk is approved as frugal, but the habit of bowing at the top of the hall, when the rites call for bowing at the bottom of the hall, is criticized as self‐aggrandizing. Thus, the rites are subject to emendation in practice, but one cannot depart from them capriciously or groundlessly. Rather, they must be practiced in such a way as to convey and reinforce deeper moral principles. Nor can one simply follow the majority: laudable practice of the rites requires thinking for oneself.

Li is best understood, then, as embodied virtue, the thoughtful somatic expression of basic moral principles, without which the ceremonies are void (cf. Analects 3.3 and 17.11). Far from a static code of conduct, li is the sum total of all the moral calculations that a thinking Confucian must go through before acting, and must be constantly reinterpreted and reapplied to suit changing situations. Thus, when Confucius tells his disciple not to look, listen, speak, or move in opposition to the rites, he does not mean that one need only memorize a certain body of accepted conventions and take care always to follow them; rather, using the fuller sense of li, he means that one must ask oneself how to put the most humane face on the rites in each new situation, and then to carry them out conscientiously. What sounds like a deceptively simple instruction is really a demand not only to act with unflagging moral awareness, but also assess for oneself the right course of action at every moment.

Political action relies, likewise, on the thoughtful performance of the moral obligations entailed by one’s position, but here Confucius’ ideas are harder to reconcile with modern preferences because of the heavy emphasis on the figure of the ruler and his decisive influence, positive or negative, on his subjects’ behavior (e.g., Analects 12.17–19; see Olberding 2012 on the importance of exemplary conduct). The key passage is Analects 12.11: “May the lord act as a lord, the minister as a minister, the father as a father, the son as a son.” As they were understood by the tradition, the phrases “to act as a lord,” “to act as a minister,” “to act as a father,” and “to act as a son” are moral demands: if a ruler, minister, father, or son are to be reckoned as such, they must act as required by their positions in society. “To act as a lord” means to live up to the moral demands of rulership: to be vigilant about one’s own conduct so as to provide a worthy model for the people to follow in their quest for moral self‐cultivation.

Confucius’ pronouncement permits some other inferences. First, modern readers can hardly avoid observing that all four characters – the lord, the minister, the father, and the son – are male. It was a social reality in Confucius’ day that lords and ministers were without exception male, but instead of “the father” and “the son,” he might well have said “fathers and mothers” and “sons and daughters.” Readers must decide for themselves how much to make of this problem (see Anne Behnke Kinney, Chapter 7, this volume). On the one hand, there is little reason why Confucius’ ideas could not be extended today to include women as well (Rosemont 1997; Clark and Wang 2004; Goldin 2011, 115–20); on the other hand, there is also little reason to suppose that he would himself have thought to do so. All his disciples were male, and his few comments about women suggest that he thought most consequential actions were undertaken by men (Goldin 2002, 55–59).

Another inescapable observation is that the four cardinal roles are all relative. No one can be a lord without a minister, a minister without a lord, a father without a son, or a son without a father. By the same token, it is possible for the same person to play more than one of these roles in different situations and in relation to different people. All males are sons, and thus any father is not only a father to his son but also a son to his own father. Similarly, a minister may be a lord in his own right, but a minister to a lord higher than he; indeed, in Bronze Age politics, even the highest king, the Son of Heaven (tianzi 天子), is conceived as a lord to all other human beings but only a vicegerent of Heaven above.7 These dimensions of Confucius’ saying should not be overlooked. All Confucian morality, as we have seen, emerges from relations with other people. It is impossible to practice shu except in relation to other people, just as virtue always has neighbors (Analects 4.25). Moreover, the stipulation that we must act in accordance with our social role means that the right way to behave depends on our relationship with the person with whom we are presently engaged (Ames 2011). There are no universally valid moral injunctions because no one is in the same social position at every instant of his or her life.

At the level of state politics, however, merely exhorting the ruler to live up to the demands of his supreme position may seem inadequate to modern readers, because Confucius does not tell us what to do if the ruler fails – as they often do. A Confucian minister is obliged to remonstrate in such cases (Vandermeersch 1994; Schaberg 1997, 2005), but rulers who heed principled remonstrance have always been in the minority. Mencius 孟子 (372–289 BC?), who expanded Confucius’ philosophy roughly two centuries later, confronted such questions more squarely, even implying a right of rebellion in extreme cases of misrule (Tiwald 2008). Confucius, by contrast, suggests that when the state is hopelessly misgoverned, one can scarcely do better than “to avoid punishment and disgrace” (Analects 5.1). He was not a democrat (Elstein 2010).

Just as there is no good solution to the problem of serving a reprobate king, Confucius acknowledges that immoral parents can place their children in intractable situations as well. On the one hand, he declares that a son should not turn in his father for stealing a sheep (Analects 13.18), because he is misguided if he thinks he owes more to the faceless state than to the father who reared and raised him. On the other hand, he recognizes that serving parents can be difficult:

The Master said: “In serving your parents, remonstrate slightly. If you see that they do not intend to follow [your advice], remain respectful and do not disobey. Toil and do not complain.”

(Analects 4.18)

The remonstrance is indispensable; “acting as a son” must include raising controversial issues with one’s parents whenever necessary. But imperfect parents are not always persuaded to mend their ways, and Confucius does not accept taking parents’ mistakes as grounds for losing one’s filial respect. “Toil and do not complain”: you may know you are in the right, but if you have done everything you can to make your case, and your parents are unmoved, you must endure your lot.

The foregoing summary of Confucius’ philosophy is by no means exhaustive; it merely presents the background necessary for understanding why he has been venerated throughout East Asia as the forefather of a distinctive moral and cultural disposition. In Western languages, this has been called “Confucianism,” a term with both supporters (for my view, see Goldin 2011, 5–6) and critics (e.g., Nylan 2001, 2n; Elman 2002). The present volume, however, is a companion to Confucius, not a companion to Confucianism, and just as Marx declared that he was not a Marxist (Marx and Engels 1975–2004, 46:356 and 49:7), the two are not identical. A companion to Confucianism would have to survey major Confucian thinkers after Confucius, their philosophical innovations, and so on. While that would be a welcome and useful resource (in English, the only large reference work of this kind is Yao 2003), the subject of this book is the figure of Confucius and his diverse representations down to the present day.

The book is divided into four parts. Part I focuses on early representations of Confucius in both textual and visual sources. In Chapter 1, “Early Sources for Confucius,” Michael Hunter begins by surveying the extant sources for Kongzi, concluding that they are so diverse, and of such questionable reliability, that they scarcely combine to paint a coherent portrait of the master. Hunter then considers the text that has traditionally been the most venerated, namely, the Analects, and observes that a reader’s assumptions about the origins of this collection, which remain disputed, will necessarily inform his or her imagination of Kongzi himself. The historical Confucius may be beyond reconstruction.

In Chapter 2, “Confucius in Excavated Warring States Manuscripts,” Scott Cook focuses on Confucius’ image in a group of texts that was not available before the 1970s: previously unknown manuscripts, some excavated by archaeologists, some looted by tomb‐robbers. After surveying the material, Cook argues that its portrayal of Confucius’ philosophical outlook is “largely concordant with what we find ascribed to him in received texts dating from the Warring States period,” yet he concludes by reminding us that these new documents await more thorough investigation.

Oliver Weingarten examines creative literary uses of the figure of Confucius in Chapter 3, “The Unorthodox Master: The Serious and the Playful in Depictions of Confucius.” These include satires, parodies, playful misreadings, the use of Confucian utterances as proof texts, and nascent hagiographies. Such appropriations and adaptations, which were often ludic, bespeak broad familiarity with the figure of Confucius at diverse levels of literate society; otherwise one could not find such a variety of depictions, Confucian and non‐Confucian alike.

In Chapter 4, “Representations of Confucius in Apocrypha of the First Century CE,” Zhao Lu discusses a particular subset of later appropriation: a corpus commonly translated as “apocrypha” (chenwei 讖緯). These texts, which were mostly lost over the subsequent centuries, reflected a growing enthusiasm for an ideal society based on the Five Classics and the restoration of the Han 漢 dynasty. In this context, Confucius became a prophet and messenger of Heaven who not only encoded his political teaching in his work, but also foretold the ascendance of the ruling Liu 劉 family. This superhuman image of Confucius was rooted in knowledge shared amongst scholars of that time.

In the final chapter in Part I, “Visual Representations of Confucius” (Chapter 5), Julia K. Murray discusses Confucius as a subject for visual representation after the Han court formally endorsed his teachings. While the earliest images appeared in schools and offering shrines during the Song 宋 period (960–1279), portrayals became more diverse and some reproduced pictures kept by his descendants. Moreover, pictorial biographies of Confucius brought him more vividly to life and to a wider range of society, and in recent decades new images of Confucius have evolved to serve a range of contemporary purposes, including politics and advertising.

Part II, “Confucian Ideas,” addresses the philosophical perspectives that have been attributed to Confucius over the centuries (some with a more solid historical basis than others). Kwong‐loi Shun opens this section with “Le in the Analects” (Chapter 6), a discussion of a term commonly translated as “joy” (le 樂). Shun begins with a survey of usage in early texts, then considers the nature of le in the Analects: a state akin to tranquility, and anchored in one’s following the ethical path and affirming such a way of life. Because the different elements of the mind are blended together in an ethical direction, there is a sense of harmony and ease. Furthermore, because the external conditions of life are invested with minor significance as compared with the ethical, one is not subject to worries about them.

In Chapter 7, “Women in the Analects,” Anne Behnke Kinney focuses on three famous (some might say infamous) comments about women that are attributed to Confucius in that text. Taken together, they demonstrate that in Confucius’ mind, high social status overrides the restrictions of gender. Just as he expresses his frustration with low‐ranking men and women of unseemly ambition, he seems willing to regard certain elite women with the same respect usually reserved for elite men. Although such women were extraordinary even among their own peers, it is no less extraordinary that the Confucius of the Analects acknowledges their accomplishments and actively engages with them, despite the objections of a narrow‐minded disciple.

Yuri Pines focuses on two other keywords, “noble man” (junzi 君子) and “petty man” (xiaoren 小人), in Chapter 8, “Confucius’ Elitism: The Concepts of junzi and xiaoren Revisited.” By comparing the usages in the Analects with earlier texts, primarily theZuo zhuan 左傳 (Zuo Commentary), Pines argues that Confucius revolutionized the concept of junzi, expanding it to include members of his own social class, the shi 士. Originally, shi denoted the lowest stratum of nobility, but eventually it referred to the elite more broadly, with membership primarily determined by one’s qualities rather than one’s pedigree. Confucius contributed to this process by allowing a more flexible conceptualization of membership in the elite. This flexibility, coupled with persistently rigid emphasis on sociopolitical hierarchy, became an effective recipe for preserving a highly stratified society while maintaining the possibility of social mobility.

Thomas Radice considers a related concept in Chapter 9, “Confucius and Filial Piety.” Rooted in early Chinese religion, Confucius’ understanding of filial piety (xiao 孝) is, in Radice’s words, “an ornamented expression to both the dead and the living.” Because parents can be fallible, filial piety requires more than straightforward deference: one must gently remonstrate with them, but also be ready to conceal their misdeeds. These are imperfect solutions for imperfect situations, and they undermine simplistic characterizations of the parent–child relationship in Confucian ethics.

In Chapter 10, “The Gentleman’s Views on Warfare According to the Gongyang Commentary,” Sarah A. Queen focuses on a different Confucian text, namely, a commentary to the canonical Springs and Autumns that operated on the assumption that Confucius was the august author. Though often overlooked as a source for understanding Confucius’ position on warfare, the Gongyang Commentary is replete with relevant material. It articulates a complex set of ethico‐ritual principles that provisionally permit certain kinds of military activities for the sake of mediating conflict until the sage rule symbolized by King Wen of Zhou 周文王 (d. 1050 BC) can be restored and peace returned to the realm.

In the final chapter in Part II, “Comparisons with Western Philosophy” (Chapter 11), Erin M. Cline explores similarities and differences between Western philosophy and Confucianism. While works that compare the thought of Confucius and Western philosophy are diverse, they share the view that comparative study is worthwhile and seek to address, in various ways, some of the common challenges that comparative studies face. In light of this body of work, Cline examines different proposed answers to the question of why comparative philosophy is worthwhile, and highlights three sets of challenges that frequently arise in comparative philosophy, which she calls thematic, interpretive, and procedural.

Parts III and IV turn to the legacy of Confucius in later centuries: Part III is devoted to imperial China, and Part IV to the modern world. In Chapter 12, “From Uncrowned King to the Sage of Profound Greatness: Confucius and the Analects in Early Medieval China,” Alan K. L. Chan limns the concerted effort by literati in the third through the sixth centuries to interrogate tradition afresh. The discourse called xuanxue 玄學 (which Chan translates as “Learning in the Profound”) juxtaposed the Confucian Analects to other texts, especially the Changes (Yijing 易經), Laozi, and Zhuangzi 莊子. This radical reinterpretation resulted in a Confucius who was a sage of “profound greatness” embodying the fullness of dao 道 in his being (xuansheng 玄聖). As literati’s interests changed, so did their Confucius.

In Chapter 13, “The Reception of The Classic of Filial Piety from Medieval to Late Imperial China,” Miaw‐fen Lu observes that biographies of women indicate the increasing importance of this text in female education, whereas biographies of men exhibit the opposite. Her explanation is that The Canon of Filial Piety played a significant role in political culture before the medieval period, but became mainly a primer after the Southern Song. The marginalization of the text in political and elite circles caused it to figure less prominently in biographies of males until it regained political importance with the support of the Qing dynasty (1636–1912).

On‐cho Ng revisits the Gongyang tradition and the concept of the “uncrowned king” in Chapter 14, “Kongzi as the Uncrowned King in Some Qing Gongyang Exegeses.” In their synoptic judgment of the ancient past, Ng maintains, Gongyang commentators of the Qing dynasty not only resisted the destructiveness of time, but also relived, retrieved, and rendered events of yore as transhistorical archetypes that serve as muse and model for contemporary political amelioration. Moreover, the symbolic enthronement of Kongzi as “uncrowned king” introduces a peculiar order of time. Whereas the historical succession of the ancient dynasties is based on a realistic temporality, the mythic systems of Confucius’ reign are built on idealized ethico‐moral standards, and thus subvert and claim priority over recorded histories.

The three chapters in Part IV address Confucius and new Confucianisms in modern East Asia. In Chapter 15, “Confucianism, Capitalism, and Shibusawa Eiichi’s The Analects and the Abacus,” John A. Tucker discusses Shibusawa Eiichi 渋沢栄一 (1840–1931), who is widely known as the father of Japanese capitalism and was also one of the more outspoken advocates of Confucius’ learning in modern Japan. Tucker examines Shibusawa’s The Analects and the Abacus (Rongo to soroban 論語と算盤) against the bleak assessment by his contemporary Max Weber (1864–1920) of Confucian cultures and their alleged inability to develop capitalism. Tucker suggests that Shibusawa’s life and thought constitute considerable counterevidence to Weber’s thesis, and also offers a historical contextualization of Shibusawa’s promotion of Confucius.

The negative images of Confucius during the 1910s and the 1920s constitute the theme of Chapter 16, “Confucius in the May Fourth Era,” by Q. Edward Wang. After the fall of the Empire, Confucius was associated with conservative political forces that were regarded as causes for the challenges faced by the newly founded Republic. To many intellectuals, the 1911 Revolution was incomplete because it created a new type of government without a new mindset for the Chinese to become citizens of the Republic. Accordingly, Confucianism was declared obsolete – but the question of how much blame to pin on Confucius himself remained open. There was also the unresolved problem of what should replace it.

In Chapter 17, “New Confucianism,” Yong Huang addresses the Confucian response to the challenge posed by modern Western ideology in the twentieth and twenty‐first centuries. What is unique about this movement, often called “New Confucianism” (xin Rujia 新儒家), is its attempt to show that traditional Confucian values and such modern Western values as rationality, modernity, science, and democracy are not only compatible, but can also significantly enrich each other. Moreover, it is noteworthy that a small but vocal conservative group of Confucians has emerged. These thinkers stress the political dimension of Confucianism, including meritocracy, and some of them advocate a Confucian constitutionalism.

In today’s bustling China, the figure of Confucius is evidently as controversial as ever, sometimes standing for the right things, sometimes standing for the wrong things, but never standing for nothing. With the conviction that only the rarest of personages can endure as cultural symbols for century after century, we offer this book to readers in search of diverse perspectives on Confucius and all that he has represented.

References

Ames, Roger T. (2011).

Confucian Role Ethics: A Vocabulary

. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.

Blakeley, Barry B. (2004). “‘On the Authenticity and Nature of the

Zuo zhuan

’ Revisited,”

Early China

, 29: 217–67.

Clark, Kelly James and Robin R. Wang (2004). “A Confucian Defense of Gender Equity,”

Journal of the American Academy of Religion

, 72(2): 395–422.

Creel, H. G. (1960).

Confucius and the Chinese Way

. New York: Harper & Row.

Creel, Herrlee G. (1970).

The Origins of Statecraft in China

. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Csikszentmihalyi, Mark (2001). “Confucius,” in David Noel Freedman and Michael J. McClymond (eds.),

The Rivers of Paradise: Moses, Buddha, Confucius, Jesus, and Muhammad as Religious Founders

. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, pp. 233–308.

Csikszentmihalyi, Mark (2002). “Confucius and the

Analects

in the Hàn,” in Bryan W. Van Norden (ed.),

Confucius and the Analects: New Essays

. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 134–62.

Deng Peiling 鄧佩玲 (2011).

Tianming, guishen yu zhudao: Dong‐Zhou jinwen guci tanlun

天命、鬼神與祝禱: 東周金文嘏辭探論. Taipei: Yiwen.

Elman, Benjamin (2002). “Rethinking ‘Confucianism’ and ‘Neo‐Confucianism’ in Modern Chinese History,” in Benjamin A. Elman et al. (eds.),

Rethinking Confucianism: Past and Present in China, Japan, Korea, and Vietnam

. Los Angeles: University of California Press. pp. 518–54.

Elstein, David (2010). “Why Early Confucianism Cannot Generate Democracy,”

Dao

, 9(4): 427–43.

Eno, Robert (2003). “The Background of the Kong Family of Lu and the Origins of Ruism,”

Early China

, 28: 1–41.

Fingarette, Herbert (1972).

Confucius: The Secular as Sacred

. New York: Harper & Row.

Gewirth, Alan (1981).

Reason and Morality

. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Goldin, Paul Rakita. 2002.

The Culture of Sex in Ancient China

. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.

Goldin, Paul R. (2005). “The Theme of the Primacy of the Situation in Classical Chinese Philosophy and Rhetoric,”

Asia Major