or mind."10 True, but in The Great Learning very inadequately set forth. 66 "The rectifying of the mind is realized when the thoughts are made sincere." And the thoughts are sincere, when no self-deception is allowed, and we move without effort to what is right and wrong, as we love what is beautiful, and as we hate a bad smell."12 How are we to attain to this state? Here the Chinese moralist fails us. According to Choo He's arrangement of the Treatise, there is only one sentence from which we can frame a reply to the above question. "Therefore," it is said, "the superior man must be watchful over himself when he is alone."13 Following Choo's 6th chapter of commentary, and forming, we may say, part of it, we have in the old arrangement of The Great Learning all the passages which he has distributed so as to form the previous five chapters. But even from the examination of them, we do not obtain the information which we desire on this momentous inquiry. 8. Indeed, the more I study the Work, the more satisfied I become, that from the conclusion of what is now called the chapter of Classical text to the sixth chapter of Commentary, we have only a few fragments, which it is of no use trying to arrange, so as fairly to exhibit the plan of the author. According to his method, the chapter on the connection between making the thoughts sincere and so rectifying the mental nature, should be preceded by one on the completion of knowledge as the means of making the thoughts sincere, and that again by one on the completion of knowledge by the investigation of things, or whatever else the phrase kih wuh may mean. I am less concerned for the loss and injury which this part of the Work has suffered, because the subject of the connection between intelligence and virtue is very fully exhibited in The Doctrine of the Mean, and will come under my notice in the review of that Treatise. The manner in which Choo He has endeavoured to supply the blank about the perfecting of knowledge by the investigation of things is too extravagant. "The Learning for Adults," he says, "at the outset of its lessons, instructs the learner, in regard to all things in the world, to proceed from what knowledge he has of their principles, and pursue his investigation of them, till he reaches the extreme point. After exerting himself for a long time, he will 10 Comm. vii. 1. 11 Comm. Ch. vi. 12 Comm. vi. 1. 13 Comm, vi. 2. suddenly find himself possessed of a wide and far-reaching penetration. Then, the qualities of all things, whether external or internal, the subtle or the coarse, will be apprehended, and the mind, in its entire substance and its relations to things, will be perfectly intelligent. This is called the investigation of things. This is called the perfection of knowledge." And knowledge must be thus perfected before we can achieve the sincerity of our thoughts, and the rectifying of our hearts! Verily this would be learning not for adults only, but even Methuselahs would not be able to compass it. Yet for centuries this has been accepted as the orthodox exposition of the Classic. Lo Chung-fan does not express himself too strongly when he says that such language is altogether incoherent. The author would only be "imposing on himself and others." 9. The orthodox doctrine of China concerning the connection between intelligence and virtue is most seriously erroneous, but I will not lay to the charge of the author of The Great Learning the wild representations of the commentator of the twelfth century, nor need I make here any remarks on what the doctrine really is. After the exhibition which I have given, my readers will probably conclude that the Work before us is far from developing, as Pauthier asserts, "a system of social perfectionating which has never been equalled.' 10. The Treatise has undoubtedly great merits, but they are not to be sought in the severity of its logical processes, or the largeminded prosecution of any course of thought. We shall find them in the announcement of certain seminal principles, which, if recog nized in government and the regulation of conduct, would conduce greatly to the happiness and virtue of mankind. I will conclude these observations by specifying four such principles. First, The writer conceives nobly of the object of government, that it is to make its subjects happy and good. This may not be a sufficient account of that object, but it is much to have it so clearly laid down to "all kings and governors," that they are to love the people, ruling not for their own gratification, but for the good of those over whom they are exalted by Heaven. Very important also is the statement that rulers have no divine right but what springs from the discharge of their duty. "The decree does not always rest 14 Suppl. to Comm. Ch. v. on them. Goodness obtains it, and the want of goodness loses it."15 Second, The insisting on personal excellence in all who have authority in the family, the State, and the empire, is a great moral and social principle. The influence of such personal excellence may be overstated, but by the requirement of its cultivation the writer deserved well of his country. Third, Still more important than the requirement of such excellence, is the principle that it must be rooted in the state of the heart, and be the natural outgrowth of internal sincerity. "As a man thinketh in his heart, so is he." This is the teaching alike of Solomon and the author of The Great Learning. Fourth, I mention last the striking exhibition which we have of the golden rule, though only in its negative form. "What a man dislikes in his superiors, let him not display in the treatment of his inferiors; what he dislikes in inferiors, let him not display in his service of his superiors; what he dislikes in those who are before him, let him not therewith precede those who are behind him; what he dislikes in those who are behind him, let him not therewith follow those who are before him; what he dislikes to receive on the right, let him not bestow on the left; what he dislikes to receive on the left, let him not bestow on the right :-this is what is called the principle with which, as with a measuring square, to regulate one's conduct."16 The Work which contains those principles cannot be thought meanly of. They are "commonplace," as the writer in the Chinese Repository calls them, but they are at the same time eternal verities. 15 Comm. x. 11. 16 Comm. x. 2. CHAPTER IV. THE DOCTRINE OF THE MEAN. SECTION I. ITS PLACE IN THE LE KE, AND ITS PUBLICATION SEPARATELY. 1. The Doctrine of the Mean was one of the treatises which came to light in connection with the labours of Lew Heang, and its place as the 31st Book in the Le Ke was finally determined by Ma Yung and Ching Heuen. 2. But while it was thus made to form a part of the great collection of Works on Ceremonies, it maintained a separate footing of its own. In Lew Hin's catalogue of the Classical Works, we find "Two pëen of Observations on the Chung Yung." In the Records of the dynasty of Suy (A.D. 589-617), in the chapter on the History of Literature, there are mentioned three Works on the Chung Yung; -the first called "The Record of the Chung Yung," in two keuen, attributed to Tae Yung, a scholar who flourished about the middle of the 5th century; the second, "A Paraphrase and Commentary on the Chung Yung," attributed to the emperor Woo (a.d. 502–549) of the Leang dynasty, in one keuen, and the third, "A Private Record, Determining the Meaning of the Chung Yung," in five keuen, the author, or supposed author, of which is not mentioned.3 It thus appears, that the Chung Yung had been published and commented on separately, long before the time of the Sung dynasty. The scholars of that, however, devoted special attention to it, the way being led by the famous Chow Leen-k'e. He was followed by the two brothers Ch'ing, but neither of them published upon it. At last came Choo He, who produced his Work called "The Chung 1中庸說二篇。隋書卷三十二志第二十七經籍 ★ - p. 12. 3 禮記中庸傳二卷宋散騎常侍戴顒撰:中庸 溝疏一卷梁武帝撰私記制合中庸義五卷 周濂溪 Yung, in Chapters and Sentences," which was made the text book of the Classic at the literary examinations, by the fourth Emperor of the Yuen dynasty (A.D. 1312-1320), and from that time the name merely of the Treatise was retained in editions of the Le Ke. Neither text nor ancient commentary was given. Under the present dynasty it is not so. In the superb edition of "The Five King" edited by a numerous committee of scholars towards the end of K'ang He's reign, the Chung Yung is published in two parts, the ancient commentaries from "The Thirteen King" being given side by side with those of Choo He. SECTION II. ITS AUTHOR; AND SOME ACCOUNT OF HIM. 1. The composition of the Chung Yung is attributed to K'ung Keih, the grandson of Confucius. Chinese inquirers and critics are agreed on this point, and apparently on sufficient grounds. There is indeed no internal evidence in the Work to lead us to such a conclusion. Among the many quotations of Confucius' words and refe rences to him, we might have expected to find some indication that the sage was the grandfather of the author, but nothing of the kind is given. The external evidence, however, or that from the testimony of authorities, is very strong. In Sze-ma Ts'een's Historical Records, published B.C. 103, it is expressly said that "Tsze-sze made the Chung Yung." And we have a still stronger proof, a century earlier, from Tsze-sze's own descendant, K'ung Foo, whose words "Tsze-sze compiled the Chung Yung in 49 peen.”2 We may, therefore, accept the received account without hesitation. are, 2. As Keih, spoken of chiefly by his designation of Tsze-sze, thus occupies a distinguished place in the classical literature of China, it 中庸章句 5 1子思作中庸; ; see the 史記四十七孔子世家.2 This Kung Fon(孔鮒) was that descendant of Confucius, who hid several books in the wall of his house, on the issuing of the imperial edict for their burning. He was a writer himself, and his Works are referred to under the title of I have not seen them, but the statement given above is found in the 四書摭餘說 .中庸-孔叢子云子思撰 中庸之書四十九篇 |