by Ying-shih Yü
BPZ, 3:598–603.
22. Jinshu, 1.136; En glish translation in Kung- chuan Hsiao, Chinese Po liti cal Thought,
635–636, with editorial modifi cations.
23. Jacob Burckhardt, The Civilization of the Re nais sance in Italy, trans. S. G. C. Middlemore
(London: Phaidon Press, 1951), 81. Although Burckhardt’s thesis has been variously
modifi ed, his basic view of Re nais sance individualism still holds well. See Ernst Cassirer,
The Individual and the Cosmos in Re nais sance Philosophy, trans. Mario Domandi (Philadel-
phia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1972), 35–36; Paul Oskar Kristeller, “Changing
Views of the Intellectual History of the Re nais sance Since Jacob Burchkhardt,” in The
160 indi v idua l is m a nd t h e ne o - daois t m ov e m e n t
Re nais sance: A Reconsideration of the Theories and Interpretations of the Age, ed. Tinsley
Helton (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1961), 30.
24. HHS, 7.1953.
25. Ibid., 10.2773.
26. Ibid., 8.2278.
27. See Tang Yongtong
, Wei- Jin xuanxue lungao
(Beijing: Renmin,
1957), 8.
28. HHS, 9.2635–2639.
29. Liu Shao, Renwu zhi, SBCK chu, shang, 4–6. Cf. J. K. Shryock, The Study of Human
Abilities: The Jen Wu Chih of Liu Shao (New Haven: American Oriental Society, 1937),
esp. pp. 99–100.
30. See Walter Ullman, The Individual and Society in the Middle Ages (Baltimore: Johns
Hopkins University Press, 1966), 105; Morris, Discovery of the Individual, 86–95.
31. Quoted in William Willets, Chinese Art, 2 vols. (Harmonds worth, UK: Penguin, 1958),
2:582. For Cao Zhi’s original text, see Yu Jianhua
, ed., Zhongguo hualun leibian
, 2 vols. (Hong Kong: Zhonghua, 1973), 1:12.
32. Mather, Tales, 368.
33. See the in ter est ing story about Gu Kaizhi adding three hairs to the cheek of the person
in a portrait to catch his “spirit” in Mather, Tales, 367.
34. See Bruno Snell, The Discovery of the Mind: The Greek Origins of Eu ro pean Thought,
trans. T. B. Rosenmeyer (New York: Harper, 1960), chap. 3; Morris, Discovery of the In-
dividual, 68–70; Burckhardt, Civilization of the Re nais sance, esp. pp. 184–188.
35.
Sui Senshu
, Gushi shijiu shou jishi
(Hong Kong: Zhonghua,
1958).
36. Yu Guanying
, “Lun jian- an Caoshi fuzi di shi”
, in Wenxue
yichan zengkan
(Beijing: Zuojia, 1955), 1:137–158.
37.
Étienne Balazs, Chinese Civilization and Bureaucracy, ed. Arthur F. Wright (New Haven:
Yale University Press, 1964), 177.
38. According to the classifi cation of Zhang Zhiyue
, thirteen out of the eighty- two
are autobiographical poems. See his “Lüe lun Ruan Ji ji qi Yonghuai shi”
, in Wei- Jin Liuchao shi yanjiu lunwen ji
(Hong Kong:
Zhongguo yuwen, 1969), 66.
39. I refer mainly to the works of Chen Yinke, Tang Yongtong, and Tang Changru
.
40. BPZ, 3:604.
41. Qian Mu, “Du Wenxuan”
, in his Zhongguo xueshu sixiangshi luncong
, 8 vols. (Taipei: Dongda tushu gongsi, 1977), 3:107.
42. Yan Kejun
, QSW, 5 vols. (Beijing: Zhonghua, 1958), 2:1088.
43. Ibid., 1141.
44. Mather, Tales, 488.
45. See Zhang Hao
, Yungu zaji
(Shanghai: Zhonghua, 1958), 97; Zhou
Fagao
, Zhongguo gudai yufa: chengdai pian
(Taipei: Aca-
demia Sinica, 1959), 83–84. See also Mather, Tales, 161, where the intimate “you” is used
with a friend.
indi v idua l is m a nd t h e ne o - daois t m ov e m e n t 161
46. Jinshu, 5.1379–1380; Mather, Tales, 12.
47. QSW, 2:1962.
48. For this standard view, see Chen Yinke, “ ‘Xiaoyao you’ Xiang- Guo yi ji Zhidun yi tan-
yuan”
, Qinghua xuebao
12, no. 2 (April 1937): 309,
and Tao Yuanming zhi sixiang, 3; Tang Yongtong, “Du Renwu zhi”
, in Wei- Jin
xuanxue lungao, 16; Aoki Masaru
, “Seidan”
, in Aoki Masaru zenshû
, 10 vols. (Tokyo: Shunjü Sha, 1969), 1:208–240.
49. Wang Fu, Qianfu lun
, annotated by Wang Jipei
, GXJBCS, 11, and Wang
Jipei’s note.
50. HHS, 7.2031.
51. Ibid., 79.2547.
52. Ibid., 78.2232.
53.
Mather, Tales, 56.
54. HHS, 9.2481.
55. Ibid., 79.2647. For more examples of this kind, see the case of Xie Zhen
and Bian
Rang
(ibid., 78.2230) and that of Kong Gongxu
(ibid., 78.2258).
56. Fung Yu- lan, History, 2:175–179.
57.
Liu Shao, Renwu zhi, shang, 22–23.
58. Ibid., shang, 11–12.
59. HHS, 6.1629.
60. Ibid., 8.2277.
61. For Wang Su’s infl uence on Wang Bi, see Meng Wentong
, Jingxue jueyuan
(Taipei: Shangwu, 1966 [reprint]), 38. Cai Yong prob ably contributed more than
anyone else to the widespread circulation of Wang Chong’s Lunheng. For instance, after
his death, Cai’s entire library was obtained by Wang Ye
, Wang Bi’s father. It is
therefore more than probable that Wang Bi had direct access to Cai’s copy of the Lun-
heng (see Bowu ji
, quoted in SGZ, 3:796). On the other hand, Ruan Yu
,
Ruan Ji’s father, had been a disciple of Cai ( SGZ, 3:600). This impor tant fact explains
why both Ruan Ji and his nephew Ruan Xiu
were so familiar with Wang Chong’s
ideas. For details, see Yü Ying- shih, Zhongguo zhishi, 339n7.
62. Miyazaki Ichisada
thinks that the transition from Pure Criticism took place in
the early de cades of the third century; see his “Seidan”
, Shirin
1, no. 31 (Janu-
ary 1946): 5. Shiba Rokurô
classifi es late Han “conversation” in terms of two
diff er ent types he calls “critical conversation” and “inquisitive conversation.” The for-
mer focused on personalities, the latter on ideas. He further states that the former
fl ourished during the reigns of Emperors Huan (147–167) and Ling (168–188), and the
latter during the reigns of Emperors Lin and Xian (189–220); see his “Kô- Kan makki no
danron ni tsuite”
, Hiroshima daigaku bungakubu kiyô
8 (October 1955): 213–242. I have examined this question in considerable
detail in “Han- Jin zhi ji shi jin xin zijue yu xin sichao”
,
originally published in Xinya xuebao
4, no. 1 (August 1959): 50–60, now in-
cluded in my Zhongguo zhishi, 236–249. For a more thorough study, see Okamura
Shigeru
, “Kô- Kan makki no heiron- teki kifü ni tsuite”
162 indi v idua l is m a nd t h e ne o - daois t m ov e m e n t
, in Nagoya daigaku bungakubu kenkyû ronshû
(Na-
goya: Nagoya University Press, 1960), 67–112.
63. Jinshu, 4.1236. For a good general discussion of the idea of nonbeing and its relationship
/> to the self- awareness of the individual during this period, see Matsumoto Gamei
, “Gi- Shin ni okeru mu no shiso no seikaku”
, Shigaku
Zasshi
51, no. 2 (February 1940): 13–42; 51, no. 3 (March 1940): 74–105; 51, no. 4
(April 1940): 63–90. However, Professor Qian Mu is one of the earliest modern scholars
to characterize Wei- Jin Neo- Daoism in terms of the self- awareness of the individual.
See Guoxue gailun
, 2 vols. (Shanghai: Shangwu, 1931), 1:150.
64. Kung- chuan Hsiao, Chinese Po liti cal Thought, 1:610–611. For a general study of the
thought of He Yan and Wang Bi, see Itano Chôhachi
, “Ka An O Hitsu no
shisô”
, Tohō gakuhō
14, no. 1 (March 1943): 43–111.
65. Chunqiu fanlu
, WYWK, 2 vols., 1:85. See also HS, punctuated edition, 8 vols.
(Beijing: Zhonghua, 1962), 6.2516. Dong Zhongshu never explic itly stated for what
purpose Heaven fi nds it necessary to produce man. However, he believed that Heaven
endows man with a nature so that he can practice ren
(humanity) and yi
(righ-
teousness) ( Chunqiu fanlu, 1.28). He further held that “humanity” is the embodiment of
Heaven’s will and “righ teousness” that of Heaven’s princi ple ( Chunqiu fanlu, 2.175).
Therefore, if hard pressed, he prob ably would say that Heaven creates man for the pur-
pose of bringing itself to moral perfection.
66. Chunqiu fanlu, 2.175.
67. See Wang Chong’s essay on “Ziran”
in Chan, SB, 296–299.
68. Guo Qingfan
, ZJS, 4 vols. (Beijing: Zhonghua, 1961), 1:111–112; En glish transla-
tion in Fung Yu- lan, History, 2:210.
69. ZJS, 1:58; En glish translation in Kung- chuan Hsiao, Chinese Po liti cal Thought, 1:612.
70. ZJS, 1:1; En glish translation slightly modifi ed from Fung Yu- lan, Chuang Tzu: A New
Selected Translation with an Exposition of the Philosophy of Kuo Hsiang, 2nd ed. (New York:
Paragon, 1964 [reprint]), 27.
71. Kung- chuan Hsiao, Chinese Po liti cal Thought, 1:612.
72. Chen Yinke, Tao Yuanming zhi sixiang, 5–6.
73. Guo Xiang says: “Nonaction does not mean that (the ruler) just sits there silently with
arms folded. Rather he allows each individual thing to undertake its own action so that,
ultimately, it may rest in the true form of its nature and life” ( ZJS, 2:369). For a general
study of the thought of Guo Xiang, see Murakami Yoshimi
, “Kaku Chô no
shisô ni tsuite”
, Tôyôshi kenkyû
6, no. 3 (May 1941):
1–28.
74. Dai Mingyang
, Xi Kang ji jiaozhu
(Beijing: Renmin wenxue, 1962),
171; translated in Kung- chuan Hsiao, Chinese Po liti cal Thought, 1:618.
75. ZJS, 1:296; translated in Kung- chuan Hsiao, Chinese Po liti cal Thought, 1:616–617.
76. For the distinction between “invisible hand” and “hidden hand,” I have followed Robert
Nozick, Anarchy State, and Utopia (New York: Basic Books, 1974), 18–20.
77. ZJS, 2:348. Commenting on the statement “the sage brings little benefi t to the world,
but much harm,” Guo Xiang says: “How true is this statement: Although this statement
indi v idua l is m a nd t h e ne o - daois t m ov e m e n t 163
is true, we nevertheless cannot do without the sage. For before all types of knowledge
have dis appeared from the world, we still need the Way of the sage to control them. If all
other kinds of knowledge are around while the sagely knowledge alone is gone, then the
world would suff er more harm than it does because of the sage. It therefore follows that in
spite of the fact that the sage brings much harm to the world, it is still far better than a
world without the sage in which disorder reigns supreme.”
78. ZJS, 2:364.
79. See Mou Runsun
, Lun Wei- Jin yilai zhi chongshang tanbian ji qi yingxiang
(Hong Kong: CUHK Press, 1966).
80. See Chen Yinke, Tao Yuanming zhi sixiang, 2; Tang Changru, Wei- Jin Nanbei chao shi
luncong
(Beijing: Sanlian, 1955), 336–339. This view is followed by
Richard Mather in “The Controversy Over Conformity and Naturalness During the Six
Dynasties,” History of Religions 9, nos. 2–3 (November 1969/February 1970): 161.
81.
HHS, 10.2773.
82. Fung Yu- lan, History, 2:32–33.
83. Shenjian, SBCK chu, 5:32–33; translated in Ch’i- yün Ch’en, Hsün Yüeh and the Mind of
Late Han China (Prince ton: Prince ton University Press, 1980), 187–188.
84. He Shao’s
biography of Wang Bi, quoted in the commentary of SGZ, 3:795; trans-
lated in Fung Yu- lan, History, 2:188. For an excellent discussion of the philosophical
signifi cance of this thesis, see Tang Yongtong, Wei- Jin xuanxue lungao, 72–83.
85. For example, see Mather, Tales, 122.
86. ZJS, 2:260; En glish translation slightly modifi ed from Kung- chuan Hsiao, Chinese Po-
liti cal Thought, 1:636–637. It is signifi cant to point out that in his commentary to the
Confucian Lunyu, Wang Bi also stressed the importance of the “meaning” as opposed
to the mere forms of the “rites.” He specifi cally remarked, “all the fi ve grades of mourn-
ing rites must each fi t the feelings of the individual mourner.” Quoted in Huang Kan
, Lunyu jijie yishu
(Taipei: Guangwen, 1968 [reprint]), 2.4a– b. This
point, as will become clear below, bears importantly on the reform movement in
mourning rites of the period.
87. See Graham, Lieh- tzu, 145.
88. Mather, Tales, 374.
89. Ibid., 324.
90. Dai Mingyang, Xi Kang ji jiaozhu, 261.
91. Ibid., 117–118; En glish translation by J. R. High tower in Anthology of Chinese Lit er a ture
from Early Times to the Fourteenth Century, ed. Cyril Birch (New York: Grove Press,
1965), 163.
92. Michel Foucault, The Order of Things: An Archaeology of the Human Sciences (New York:
Vintage, 1973), 207. See also Hayden V. White, “Foucault Decoded: Notes from Under-
ground,” History and Theory 12, no. 1 (1973): 23–54.
93. Jinshu, 4.997.
94. HHS, 3.573, 4.1119. See also the illuminating discussion by Gu Yanwu
in his
Rizhilu
, WYWK, 12 vols., 5:40.
95. Mather, Tales, 372.
164 indi v idua l is m a nd t h e ne o - daois t m ov e m e n t
96. Ibid., 10–11.
97. Jinshu, 8.2396. See also Tang Changru, “Wei- Jin xuanxue zhi xingcheng ji qi fazhan”
, in Wei- Jin Nanbei chao, esp. pp. 336–337.
98. A comprehensive study of mourning rites in this period is provided by Fukikawa Ma-
sakazu
in Gi- Shin jidai ni okeru sôfukurei no kenkyû
(Tokyo: Keibun Sha, 1960). For more details about this movement in ritual
reform, see Yü Ying- shih, Zhongguo zhishi, 358–372.
99. For speech and voice, see examples listed and discussed in Yü Ying- shih, Zhongguo
zhishi, 243–249. For the importance of logic in conversation, see He Changqun
,
Wei- Jin qingtan sixiang chulun
(Shanghai: Shangwu, 1947), 7–8.
100. See Zhao Yi
, “Qingtan yong zhuwei”
, in Nian ershi zhaji
(Taipei: Huashi, 1977), 167–168.
101. For example, Chen Xianda
, a military man of humble social origin, told his son:
“The fl y whisk is something belonging exclusively to such distinguished families as the
Wangs and the Xies. It is not the sort of thing that you should carry around.” See Nan
Qi shu
, punctuated edition, 3 vols. (Beijing: Zhonghua, 1992), 2:490.
102. Ibid., 2:598. The text does not give personal names for these conversationalists. The
identifi cations of Yuan Can, Xie Zhuang, and Zhang Xu have been established as a re-
sult of an extensive search in vari ous biographies of the dynastic histories. My reasons
for these identifi cations may be briefl y stated as follows:
In Wang Sengqian’s biography, Yuan Shu
(408–453) and Xie Zhuang are men-
tioned as Wang’s intimate friends (2:591). However, Yuan Shu died too early to fi t into
the picture. On the other hand, the identifi cation of Xie Zhuang is unmistakable
because he is referred to in the letter by his offi
cial title zhongshu ling
(Prefect of
the Palace Secretariat), a position he did, in fact, hold ( Songshu
, punctuated edition
[Beijing: Zhonghua, 1974], 8, 2167–2177). Therefore, the letter must have been written
sometime before Xie’s death in 466 when Wang was about forty, an age old enough to
have a son in his late teens or early twenties. Yuan Can was Yuan Shu’s nephew. He
changed his personal name to Can after the famous Pure Conversationalist Xun Can
of the third century. Moreover, he served as prefect of vari ous provinces and was
well known for his study of the Yijing ( Songshu, 8, 2229–2234). This fi ts perfectly well
with the reference in the letter. As for Zhang Xu, he was a man of Wuxing with a great
reputation as a Pure Conversationalist. Although he was particularly known for his
knowledge of the Yijing, there can be little doubt that he must also have been versed in
the Laozi ( Nan Qi shu, 2:600–602). His fi rst cousin, Zhang Rong
(444–497), for
instance, was a famous Neo- Daoist conversationalist with a special interest in the Laozi
( Nan Qi shu, 3:721–730). The simple fact that both Wang Sengqian’s and Zhang Xu’s
biographies are included in the same chapter also indicates a close relationship between
the two men.
Without giving his reasons, however, Professor Qian Mu has identifi ed the three
conversationalists as Yuan Can, Xie Fei, and Zhang Xu ( Guoxue gailun, 1:163). The fi rst
and third identifi cations agree with my fi ndings. However, his identifi cation of Xie