The Chu Hsi and Wang Yang-ming Schools

·期刊原文
The Chu Hsi and Wang Yang-ming Schools at the End of the Ming and Tokugawa Periods
By Takehiko Okada
Translated by Robert J. J. Wargo
Philosophy East and West
Vol. 23, No. 1-2 (January-April 1973)
pp. 139-162
Copyright 1973 by University of Hawaii Press
Hawaii, USA

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

p. 139 The Chu Hsi and Wang Yang-ming Schools at the End of the Ming and Tokugawa Periods Philosophy East & West, Vol. 23, No. 1/2 (1973)

I.
According to Wang Lung-ch'i, a disciple of Wang Yang-ming, there were, even in his time, already six competing interpretations of Wang Yang-ming's doctrine of "extending intuitive knowledge," namely, (1) the "return to tranquility" doctrine, (2) the "cultivation" doctrine, (3) the "prior emergence" doctrine, (4) the "realization or manifestation" doctrine, (5) the "substance function" doctrine, and (6) the "end-beginning" doctrine. Further, he went on to provide a clear delineation of the distinguishing characteristics of each of them. [1] Nonetheless, if we take a broad view of the conditions prevailing after Wang Yang-ming's death it probably will be fair to say that his disciples were divided into the following three schools: (1) the Existentialist or Realization school, (2) the Quietist or Tranquility school, and (3) the Cultivation school.

The realization doctrine was propounded by disciples such as Wang Lung-ch'i and Wang Hsin-chai. Since Lung-ch'i took intuitive knowledge to be something manifest, he relied exclusively on techniques and practice based on substance (pen-t'i) and dismissed both the efficacy and accumulation of techniques. He took the basis of learning to be an intuitive entering into the immediately presented manifest substance wherein being and nothingness are dynamically identical. Now, this spontaneous enlightenment is quite readily accompanied by an unhappy tendency to degenerate into illusory views, with the result that one may merely play at being enlightened. However, Lung-ch'i put his effort into devising practices that transcended mere devices and that dispensed with the painful and artificial effort of bringing the intuition to reality while at the same time avoiding this tendency. Like Wang Lung-ch'i, Wang Hsin-chai also sought the immediate intuition which was immediately there before one's eyes, but since he took personal experience to be fundamental, had a healthy respect for facts, and incorporated some clever intuitive devices in his teaching method, his realization doctrine became even more simple and immediate than that of Lung-ch'i.

Wang Hsin-chai's teaching was transmitted to Lo Chin-hsi and then to Chou Hai-men and as the teaching was transmitted, the realization doctrine became even shallower and narrower. Chin-hsi affirmed the perfect intuition which brought nothingness into things. Like Lung-ch'i, he demanded the immediate eternal-present, the universal No-Mind. He thus gave the "heart of a baby" as an example of the actual existence of intuitive wisdom, and he emphasized that immediate beliefs or instincts are essential to a clear awareness or intuition. Moreover he was highly skilled in devising methods of enlightening a person in the twinkling of an eye. However his teachings were unrefined and disorganized, they lacked polish, and there are some places where he fell into

p. 140 The Chu Hsi and Wang Yang-ming Schools at the End of the Ming and Tokugawa Periods Philosophy East & West, Vol. 23, No. 1/2 (1973)

merely intellectual understanding. In his later years, he finally came to cultivate practical teaching and searched for the vitality of the mind, which could bring all things into one whole, in the fact and application of the six Confucian texts, the Analects, and the Mencius. He thought all the Confucian teachings were reducible to these concepts. Lo Chin-hsi's "practical teaching" became even more pronounced when it reached Keng T'ien-t'ai. Keng T'ien-t'ai highly prized the vitality of mind, but he became deeply distressed by the tendency to fall into the illusory emptiness of Buddhism and Taoism, the fleeting, arbitrary views and willfulness of Li Cho-wu, which will be spoken of later. He particularly sought the fundamental rearing place of this vital principle in the facts of human morality, and as a result he came to deny the "perfect enlightenment" regarded as central by Wang Lung-ch'i. For this reason he took daily speech and activity, moral observance, self-observation, and success in the official ranks to be the basic conditions of learning. He stated that the difference between Confucianism and Buddhism is to be found in the former's ability and the latter's inability to be effective in these areas. However, he lapsed into shallowness and one may suspect that his thought was lacking in clarity and purity from the beginning.

Chou Hai-men, like Lo Chin-hsi and others, had a truly remarkable ability to bring a person to sudden enlightenment by means of clever dialogue in a face-to-face situation. Chou Hai-men received and accepted Wang Lung-ch'i's liberation from goodness theory and earnestly defended it as the correct interpretation of Yang-ming's four statements. According to Chou Hai-men, the cultivation of freedom from goodness is the original mind itself, that is, it is based on primordial nature, and as such it is common to both the higher and lower roots (the common and superior man). This, he says, is the true meaning of Yang-ming's four statements and further, it is the basic meaning of the way of the sage. If one expounds and adheres to the necessity of good theory (the existential-good theory), one cannot escape clinging to form rather than essence and, thus, cannot escape becoming trapped in subjectivism. The existential-good theory is really the "gate of convenience," according to Chou Hai-men. In the intellectual world of the Late Ming, the liberation from goodness theory enjoyed great popularity, and it owed much of its popularity to the efforts of Chou Hai-men. The point taken as central in his rendering of the realization theory was the strong emphasis on the realization of one's own self. In other words, he not only took self-realization as the actuality of the universe, but also benevolence, righteousness, propriety, and wisdom were nothing other than the subject matter of this self-realization. Thus, he taught the necessity of immediate faith in the manifestation of the self and the immediacy of the identity of self-awareness and self-attainment. Between them, there was not even a moment's hesitation or deliberation.

Among the followers of the Realization school is the group called the "Mad"

p. 141 The Chu Hsi and Wang Yang-ming Schools at the End of the Ming and Tokugawa Periods Philosophy East & West, Vol. 23, No. 1/2 (1973)

school. They were a group who really tried to catch dragons with an "empty hand" or who would "pinch the point of a sword" with sharp repartee and dabble in utilitarian ventures and sly stratagems. They also had a great respect for spiritedness, placed great emphasis on character and breeding, and highly prized chivalry. Moreover, they despised the roles and formalities of the various religious sects as being fetters to their freedom, and they had a tendency to dismiss these as paths which raised obstacles to understanding by an emphasis on artificial efforts. He Hsin-yin and Li Cho-wu are typical representatives of this group. He Hsin-yin honored spiritedness and stressed the intimate relation between a teacher and his student. According to him, spirit was that great force which created the order of heaven and earth, and even the relationship of teacher and student was permeated by it. Accordingly, it one could nurture the natural superior talents and at the same time he united with the higher functions, then, and only then, could one become ruler of the world. He Hsin-yin, at times, appears to subscribe to the "secret of the blood-thirsty spirit" of the Yin-fu Ching (a manual of the military arts). In the spirit of Wang Hsin-chai's Practical Learning, this was a small change, which was used in a revolutionary application for the construction of a republican or democratic society. Since He Hsin-yin was a "mad one" and a revolutionary thinker, he did not fit into and political structures, and he wished himself to be compared to Hsu Hsi the established structure. Thus, he felt the pressure of the established social who had been maligned and accused of being a heretic.

Like Lin Chao-en, Li Cho-wu proclaimed the unity of Buddhism, Taoism, and Confucianism, taking Wang Lung-ch'i as his master in the synthesizing of these three paths. Li Cho-wu rejected empty phrases and cliches, and had great reverence for facts and practical utility, and placed emphasis on the simple demands of the common people and natural dispositions. He excoriated the "ethicism" and the "emphasis on doctrine and ritual" of the orthodox school of ethics (Sung Confucianism). He hated the "morality" and "traditional culture inheritance" of which they spoke, saying that these shackled human freedom; and he claimed that the true essence of right living was to be found in adopting a "child's heart," in following one's basic nature. Thus, he proclaimed both the equality of men and women, and the freedom of speech. He raised the standard of antiestablishmentarianism, disparaged the ulterior motives of the promulgators of this moral standard, remonstrated and rebuked the government officials of the day, grew terrible in his anger at the society of that time, performed many outrageous acts without regard to what others would think or say, and dared to take up the madman's heresy.

According to tradition, he said, "Neither wine, women, wealth, nor disposition place any obstacle to following the Bodhisattva path." Because there were so many mysterious and eccentric things in his work, he was severely criticized by the intelligentsia at large as one who destroyed the social order and the

p. 142 The Chu Hsi and Wang Yang-ming Schools at the End of the Ming and Tokugawa Periods Philosophy East & West, Vol. 23, No. 1/2 (1973)

traditional cultural inheritance with his self-indulgent, mad, and unscrupled behavior.

The Tranquility school began with Nieh Shuan-chiang and gradually developed to its perfection through Lo Nien-an, Liu Liang-feng, Wan Ssu-mo and Wang T'ang-nan. Nieh Shuan-chiang settled on the root and branch theory as being fundamental to Wang Yang-ming's "extending intuitive knowledge" theory. He divided intuitive knowledge into the reality of tranquility and the responsive function, and claimed that the fundamental point of Wang Yang-ming's extending intuitive knowledge theory was that the substance or essence is logically prior and it will naturally and spontaneously lead or direct function. This is summarized in the statement "establish the substance and reach the function." Thus he espoused a version of the return to tranquility theory wherein the appearance of function is liberated from human artifice and self-indulgence and becomes the pure natural essence just as it is. Lo Nien-an regarded tranquility theory as a thunderclap means but also recognized that within the theory there was the unhealthy tendency toward quietism, and he tried to attain the state referred to in the Book of Great Learning as "knowing the resting point" as the goal. In the end, however, he witnessed the marked spreading of corrupt practices within both the Cultivation and the Realization Schools, particularly in the latter. Consequently, he came to expound on the return to tranquility since he felt that periodic control and reassessment were essential to true understanding. Moreover, both Shuan-chiang and Nien-an agreed that the fundamental core of Wang Yang-ming's extending intuitive knowledge theory was not to be found in the pronouncements of his later years, but rather it was to be found in the teachings of his middle period when tranquility was emphasized. Thus, they placed particular emphasis on the first volume of the Instructions for Practical Living, which recorded the words and deeds of the master's middle years.

Liu Liang-feng took the "empty nature" of intuitive knowledge to be the ground of constant growth and placed particular emphasis on its vital spirit. Wan Ssu-mo regarded as essential the practice of quietly gathering or collecting one's mind, quietly cognizing one's own heart. His orientation was, in general, the same as Wang T'ang-nan who began with the "collecting and tranquilizing of the mind." This was something which destroyed the dichotomy of being and nonbeing, intuition and practice. While being based on feeling, it transcended feeling; while being based on tranquility, it transcended tranquility. It was something which was based on vitality, yet transcended it. This state was so complete that even words like nature or clear intuition were mere empty phrases that could not describe its character. Wang Yang-ming in his last years had expounded a theory of "all things being of one substance," and this concept was most dearly developed and explained by the return to tranquility group.

p. 143 The Chu Hsi and Wang Yang-ming Schools at the End of the Ming and Tokugawa Periods Philosophy East & West, Vol. 23, No. 1/2 (1973)

The Quietist and the Realization schools were most successful in developing the two poles of Wang Yang-ming's thought. However, precisely because of this, there was also a tendency for them to incline strongly toward one doctrine or the other, to be swept up by the dynamic aspect to be submerged in the static. Between these two extreme schools was the Cultivation school of Hsü Heng-shan, Tsou Tung-kuo, Ou-yang Nan-yeh, and others. This school thoroughly absorbed the spirit of Wang Yang-ming's teaching, preserved and transmitted it faithfully and accurately. In doing so, the members of this school labored to correct the extreme tendencies of the other two schools. Moreover, this school responded vigorously to the criticisms of Wang's teaching put forth by the followers of Chu Hsi. Ch'ien Hsü-shan was a Confucian scholar who propounded the necessity of good theory. He placed central emphasis on the cultivation of original substance through practice of a definite regimen and engaged in disputes with Wang Lung-ch'i, who defended the liberation from goodness theory. Ch'ien Hsü-shan thought that the intuitive knowledge of Yang-ming could only be extended by means of sincerity. He criticized those who explained the extension of intuitive knowledge in terms of either quietude or enlightenment as being fundamentally mistaken.

Tsou Tung-kuo thoroughly absorbed the essence of Wang Yang-ming's thought and explained it as the union of practice and original substance. However, because he was painfully aware of the harmful and degenerate practices and heresies of the followers of the Realization school who had fallen into eccentricities by emphasizing intuition at the expense of practice, he expended his energies in the cultivation of original substance through a definite regimen of practice. The techniques that Tsou Tung-kuo thought to be necessary were the concrete practices of trustworthiness and loyalty, the correcting of one's own mistakes, the transformation of the good, prudence, and the like, but he also included on this list the "earnestness" or "reverence" (ching) of the Sung scholars which Wang Yang-ming had never used in connection with intuitive knowledge. Moreover, seeing that there was a tendency for the followers of the Realization school to make light of the principles of nature, he proclaimed that intuitive knowledge was identical with the principles of nature. Thus, there was a tendency for him to be fundamentally concerned with nature (hsing) even when expounding on mind.

Ou-yang Nan-yeh argued that while it was a mistake to wholly separate original substance, efforts, and practical effects, it was just as much a mistake to confuse them and recognize no distinctions at all between them. However, he also was aware of the excesses of the followers of the Realization school and thus ultimately placed the greatest emphasis on practice. These scholars of the Cultivation school clearly understood the essential theme of Wang-Yang-ming's doctrine of the unity of substance and practice and thus repudiated any tendency to lean toward one at the expense of the other. At the same time, they were

p. 144 The Chu Hsi and Wang Yang-ming Schools at the End of the Ming and Tokugawa Periods Philosophy East & West, Vol. 23, No. 1/2 (1973)

also quite aware of the propensity to backsliding, and they thus required concrete, self-correcting practices admonishing their followers in the following way: "Do not deceive yourself," "Put one's effort into action and be aware of one's acts," "Turn to the good and correct wrongs." This resulted in a tendency to place more emphasis on cultivation than on insight.

Among Tsou Tung-kuo's disciples were Hu Lu-shan and Li Chien-lo, who particularly emphasized concrete practice and poured their energies into combating the nihilistic excesses of the Mad-Zenists of the Realization school. Lu-shan expounded on the awareness of mind and taught that it was more important to thoroughly fulfill mind and nature rather than to distinguish them academically. He sought this fulfillment of mind and nature in the concrete instances of morally regulated behavior and virtuous conduct. Li Chien-lo expounded on and developed the position of his master, Tsou Tung-kuo, which emphasized nature by sharply distinguishing mind from nature. Thus he advocated the centrality of nature and rejected all interpretations which gave precedence to mind. As a result, he came to criticize both Wang Yang-ming and Chu Hsi as upholders of the centrality of mind as idealists. He demanded the concrete realization of practice and regarded knowing the resting place and self-cultivation of the Book of Great Learning as being equally essential to this end. Thus, he advocated both the culmination and cultivation.

This is only the barest outline of the thought of the three schools of the followers of Wang Yang-ming, but it should be noted that among the three schools only the Realization school was in harmony with the spirit of the society of the Late Ming. This is probably owing to the fact that, while the Quietist school and the Cultivation-Culmination school had within them tendencies to depart from and even directly conflict with the spirit of the age, the Realization school conformed to that spirit and even adapted the rationalism (li-hsüeh) prevalent since the Late Sung to the development of Wang Yang-ming's teachings. As time went by the thought of the Realization school became even more simple and direct. As this process of simplification developed, the teaching of the Realization school came to have a more universal appeal until the point was reached where it became popular even among the unlettered workmen, peasants, and shopkeepers.

However, this tendency culminated in a complete reliance on simple and unsophisticated natural dispositions by the followers of this school. Their activities degenerated into outlandish and willful behavior to the extent that they even deliberately violated the prevailing social and moral laws. Because of this not only the followers of the Tranquility school and the Cultivation school, but also the Neo-Chu Hsi scholars of the Chan Kan-ch'üan school and the Tung-lin school, and even the Neo-Wang scholars such as Liu Nien-t'ai devoted much of their energy to the correction of these tendencies. Moreover, even such scholars of the Critical school as Ch'en Ch'ing-lao, Feng Chen-pai,

p. 145 The Chu Hsi and Wang Yang-ming Schools at the End of the Ming and Tokugawa Periods Philosophy East & West, Vol. 23, No. 1/2 (1973)

Wu Su-yuan, and He Ch'u-wang joined in the attempt to correct these deviations.

Hsu Ching-an, a follower of Chan Kan-ch'üan, maintained the objectivity and purity of original nature even more strongly than did Ch'eng Chu, and he regarded the strict practice of self-discipline as fundamental. He noted that the Realization school, in claiming that there was no personal self to control and by emphasizing the manifestation or realization of the true self had thereby fallen into mad and outlandish behavior, and thus he spoke of the necessity of self-discipline, and soundly criticized the liberation from goodness theory of Wang-Lung-ch'i which had become the foundation of the school. In so doing, he became a strong advocate of the necessity of good theory. Moreover, he stressed the importance of practice as opposed to rhetoric. However by the time of his disciple Feng Shao-hsü, it was said that without the excoriating of heresies it would be impossible to attain an understanding of the Tao and the perception of the mind. Thus, Feng Shao-hsü devoted much time and energy to public lectures. He used the question of the affirmation or negation of principles (li) to clarify the distinctions between Confucianism and Buddhism. He also strongly criticized the Buddhist theory of emptiness which negated principle, saying that in the end, the Buddhist theory of emptiness allowed desire to run its course and even became the advocate of worldly considerations of name and profit. Feng Shao-hsü revived the necessity of good theory and poured his energies into critical attacks on the transcendence of good and evil theory of the Realization school, warning that this theory was nothing more than disguised Buddhism. According to Shao-hsü this theory became popular because the distinction between original substance and practice was not made sufficiently clear; consequently, both concepts were lost. Thus, he endeavored to distinguish clearly and precisely the particular characteristics of original nature and practice. By doing so he hoped to show how both were originally a single undivided whole. Shao-hsü thought that what was necessary was a thorough penetration into original substance in the tranquil aspect and subsequently supplementing this with continual detailed investigations in the active aspect.

The two scholars who formed the nucleus of the Tung-lin school were Ku Ching-yang and Kao Ching-i. They criticized and rejected the teachings of Lu Hsiang-shan and Wang Yang-ming, while they applauded the li-hsüeh teachings of Chu Hsi. Reflecting on the evil trends of their times, they debater the merits of public opinion and devoted themselves to the correcting of errors, in both academic and governmental spheres, they taught a strict observance of morality and maintained the efficacy of moral courage. Among their disciples, however, there was a tendency of bravado and an exaggeration of the efficacy of moral courage. This led some of them to make an enemy of the whole society and to severely criticize the government of the period. In the end, they de-

p. 146 The Chu Hsi and Wang Yang-ming Schools at the End of the Ming and Tokugawa Periods Philosophy East & West, Vol. 23, No. 1/2 (1973)

generated into the cruelty and lack of feeling that had characterized the Legalist school. Because of this, people came to regard the name Tung-lin, which originally was applied to a school of the Ch'ing dynasty, as the name of a political party. However both Ku Ching-yang and Kao Ching-i personally rejected indiscriminate quarreling with people and emphasized the actual personal realization of nature and principle as well as the attainment of rest and tranquility. They argued that if this personal experience were not present, then, the criticism of public opinion and the efficacy of moral courage would degenerate into more dispute, mutual selfishness, and mere personal attack. Further, they labored to insure that the Tung-Lin school would be recognized as an academic school rather than a political party.

Although both men were critical of the teachings of Lu Hsian-shan and Wang Yang-ming, yet they absorbed much of their teachings into their points of view. Thus they did not attempt to defend Chu Hsi's thought without change, but criticized what they thought needed to be criticized in Chu Hsi's doctrines and in doing so developed new and fresh interpretations. Ku Ching-yang and Kao Ching-i hoped to save the people of that period who had been thrown into confusion by the followers of the Realization school, and to that end they used various means. First of all, they expounded the real existence of heavenly principles, revived the nature is good theory and expended much energy in combating the then current transcendence of good and evil theory. Moreover they argued that if great effort was not expended in the realization of both original nature and discipline it would be nearly impossible to expect the attainment of tranquility. Further, they poured criticism on the doctrine of the Realization school that "All is manifest -- The momentary is all there is; all is as it should be just as it is."

The insistence of both Ku and Kao that the most essential task was to seek out the heavenly principles and clarify the distinction between right and wrong through the investigation of all things also stemmed from this notion. However, even though they recognized the necessity of the investigation of all things they understood this as an internal process and consequently added various disciplines for one's own mind and body in order to submerge themselves in the tranquility of principle and nature. Thus they were not always fully in accord with the letter of Chu Hsi's teaching in respect to the investigation of all things; rather, they became more and more involved in the details of uniting mind and principle, knowledge and action, original nature and discipline. The central focus of their activity was the attainment of deep creativity of self-realization through a personal discipline leading to tranquility. Moreover it was only by means of such a discipline that the evils of the mad Ch'anists of the Realization school and the sectarianism of the followers of Chu Hsi could be redressed. In short it would probably be fair to say as did Chang Yang-yuan, that the Tung-lin school took the two characters ching (tranquility) and wu (enlighten-

p. 147 The Chu Hsi and Wang Yang-ming Schools at the End of the Ming and Tokugawa Periods Philosophy East & West, Vol. 23, No. 1/2 (1973)

ment) to be the entrance way of practice. For this reason it is quite understandable that they were sympathetic with such Sung and Ming scholars who emphasized tranquility as Chou Lin-ch'i, Lo Yu-ch'ang, Li Yen-ping, Ch'en Pai-sha and Lo Nien-an.

The scholarly world of the Late Ming was further illumined by the appearance of Hsü Ching-an's disciple Liu Nien-t'ai. Nien-t'ai criticized both Chu Hsi and Wang Yang-ming, but he also managed to effect a partial synthesis of their views. One would be justified in saying that when Liu Nien-t'ai expounded on nature (hsing) he did so on the basis of mind and feeling. He disliked taking nature as a topic of discussion in the abstract, but would always speak of it in terms of mind substance (hsin-t'i). What Nien-t'ai calls "mind substance" is the ground of the mind, but according to him it is not a separate thing which controls the mind, but rather it is the controlling power of the mind. For him there is an identity of the controlling power and the stream or flow of the mind. This mind substance is the invisible controlling power wherein there is no separation, of existence and nonexistence; it is a unity of being and nonbeing. Accordingly, mental substance was both not yet manifest and manifested all at once. According to Liu Nien-t'ai this simply means that this mind power was the awareness of good and evil and the inclination to love good and despise evil. The basis for Nien-t'ai's taking the already given thought as not yet manifest and his regarding it as mind substance was simply because of his high regard for the pulse of life and his extreme concern about the mind becoming dissipated and directed outward. Liu Nien-t'ai who took (yi) will, to be the lord of the mind, distinguished will (yi) from thought (nien) as the place where mind manifested itself. By means of this distinction he thought he could wipe the fog which Buddhism and Taoism cast over Confucianism. According to Liu Nien-t'ai, Yang Tz'u-hu, Ch'eng I, Chu Hsi, and Wang Yang-ming, sought to discover the nature of actuality in the rise and fall of thought and desires, and in the end could not avoid falling into vacuity or disunity. It goes without saying that Liu Nien-t'ai also took sincerity as the hallmark of learning. According to Liu Nien-t'ai, sincerity is a separate name for the true, honest and direct activity of knowledge spoken of by Wang Yang-ming. This, he says, displays the basic import of practice.

Liu Nien-t'ai placed a great emphasis on self-restraint even when alone (shen-tu) and urged a strict self-reflective discipline. Eventually he came to regard sincerity as the central point of learning, and subsequent to this he argued that the teachings of the ancients about self-restraint could he understood only if practiced deliberately and sincerely. Further, he contended if one did not make self-restraint (even when alone) the nucleus of sincerity there would be the danger of falling into the emptiness of the Buddhists. According to him, even the Book of Great Learning becomes a consistent, integrated work only when sincerity is taken as the nucleus. If this is not done

p. 148 The Chu Hsi and Wang Yang-ming Schools at the End of the Ming and Tokugawa Periods Philosophy East & West, Vol. 23, No. 1/2 (1973)

and something besides sincerity is taken as the nucleus, the unity of the work is lost, and it is fragmented into a chaos of disparate pieces. He thought all of these interpretations arose because none of them were clear on the importance of sincerity. One can say that Liu Nien-t'ai's sincerity theory really discovered the essence of Wang Yang-ming's teaching of the unity of original substance and practice. Yet, it is also true that he could not have constructed this theory until after he had entered into the details of Wang Yang-ming's thesis concerning the inclination to love good and hate evil and clearly understood the subtle essence of the theory of the unity of knowledge and action.

The society of the Late Ming was in a state of disorganization and much of the blame for that can be laid at the door of the followers of the Realization school. At that time the Realization doctrine was popular not only among the Confucian schools but also among the followers of Zen; the two groups became as one and gave birth to the heresy of mad and irresponsible actions. Chih-hsü grieved when he saw the Zen followers of this time fall victim to mad interpretations, deliberately break the moral code, and give up any good reputation they may have had. Among the Confucian scholars who decried these heresies and evil practices there were those who strongly criticized Lu Hsiang-shan and Wang Yang-ming as being the sources of these aberrations.

Ch'en Ch'ing-lan was typical of these Confucianists and his criticisms had a great influence on the thought of the Late Ming and Early Ch'ing periods. Ch'en Ch'ing-lan carefully distinguished the views of Chu Hsi and Lu Hsiang-shan from the point of view of both principle and mind. He regarded all attempts to make mind learning (hsin-hsüeh) primary to be Zenist in spirit and criticized them from the nationalist (ethnic) standpoint. However, there were Confucian scholars of the Late Ming period who not only criticized Lu and Wang but also Ch'eng I and Chu Hsi. In particular Wu Ssu-yüan and He Ch'u-yang resurrected the ancient teachings and propounded the identity of nature (hsing) and (ch'i) (matter), and a monism which united principles (li) and matter (ch'i) although matter was regarded as the more fundamental. From that standpoint, they excoriated the School of Principles of the Sung and Ming periods as having fallen into the emptiness and abstraction of the Taoists and Buddhists. As is well known, their thought exerted a great influence on the Ancient Learning school of Japan. [2]

Thus far I have attempted to give an outline of the condition of Confucianism in the late Ming period by focusing on the development of and relations between the Wang Yang-ming and Chu Hsi schools. It was just this tradition which was adapted and developed by the Confucianists of the Edo period in Japan. However the method by which these teachings were taken in and applied

p. 149 The Chu Hsi and Wang Yang-ming Schools at the End of the Ming and Tokugawa Periods Philosophy East & West, Vol. 23, No. 1/2 (1973)

has a unique Japanese stamp. Not only was there a certain rapprochement with traditional Japanese thought, but there also emerged a degree of self-consciousness with respect to the concept of kokutai, the national polity. I will describe the broad outlines of the development of and interrelations between the Chu Hsi and Wang Yang-ming schools at the end of the Tokugawa period. In doing so, I will attempt to clarify the manner in which Confucianism was adapted and practiced in Japan.

II.
The primary family of scholars attached to the Edo shogunate was the Hayashi family, and for the first three generations, that is, Hayashi Razan, Hayashi Gahō, and Hayashi Kōhō, they reigned both in name and in fact over the whole nation as the most influential teachers of the period. Great scholars were produced one after the other among the disciples of Razan and his fellow scholar, Kinoshita Jun'an. There were, however, a number of scholars in Edo who preserved enough vitality to rival the Hayashi school and even in the provinces many great scholars emerged. In the central provinces, Kyoto and Kinki, there was the Kōsei-ha of Nakae Toju which centered about Wang Yang-ming, the Horikawa-ha of Itō Jinsai which proclaimed a "return to the ancients," and the Kimon-ha of Yamasaki Ansai which propounded a separate sect of Chu Hsi Confucianism in contrast to the Chu Hsi Confucianism of the Hayashi family. Since these groups were all vital and contentious, the Hayashi school gradually lost a great deal of its influence. Even the culture of Edo had, by the Genroku and Hōei periods (1688-1710), come to its peak and was on the point of decline. In the first year of the Kyoho period (1716), Ogyū Sorai appeared on the scene, formed the Ken'en Society and propounded a "return to the ancient learning" and a reexamination of the ancient texts. The Ken'en school was well suited to the reactionary spirit of the time and the characteristics of the population of Edo. Because of this it became quite popular and reached a peak of popular success in the An'ei and Temmei periods (1772-1778). All during this period, scholars of various persuasions -- synthesizers, independents, philologists, and interpreters -- appeared in profusion and passed their teachings on to disciples. Following the lead of the Ken'en school, even literary men and poets set themselves up as scholars and vigorously contended in the production of novel theories. They were bored with the careful annotation of the various masters' teachings and, instead, loudly voiced their own theories while cavalierly proclaiming themselves masters of Confucian scholarship. Many were there who appeared on the scene attempting to gain a reputation hy vigorous self-advertising. Because of this, the atmosphere of deep feeling and fruitful scholarship at the capital, Kyoto, was gradually lost and in its place

p. 150 The Chu Hsi and Wang Yang-ming Schools at the End of the Ming and Tokugawa Periods Philosophy East & West, Vol. 23, No. 1/2 (1973)

there developed a cacophony at arbitrary, self-seeking proclamations. There is an unexpected similarity of this chaotic atmosphere in Japan and the chaos created by the followers of the Realization school in the Late Ming period.

Worried by this state of affairs, the Shogunate promulgated a law prohibiting heretical learning in the second year of the Kansei period (1790), promoted Hayashi Jussai and proceeded to exert every ounce of its energy in the restoration of Chu Hsi's doctrines. It tried to tighten up and freshen the "official learning" and thereby unify scholarly thought. Jussai, in turn, promoted Sato Issai, and together they worked to implement this policy. However, by that time, it was no longer possible to control the situation by merely loudly proclaiming the rectitude of the official learning, that is, Chu Hsi's doctrines.

Both Jussai and Issai became followers of Fujiwara Seika. Although they "hung out the Chu Hsi shingle," they rejected a narrow-minded, sectarian view and worked to promote a renaissance of Chu Hsi's thought while maintaining a synoptic or holistic attitude. According to Issai, neither Seika nor the Hayashi were doctrinaire at first, and he severely criticized the narrow-mindedness of the Yamasaki school. After Jussai's demise, Issai continued to maintain the essential identity of Chu Hsi and Lu Hsiang-shan, but, in fact, Issai was from the first a scholar who was said to be a follower of Chu Hsi by day and a follower of Lu Hsiang-shan by night. Many great scholars emerged one after the other from the ranks of Issai's disciples and since they were active in the service of many clans, he came to be one of the most prestigious scholars in all Japan, respected and treated with deference from both above and below.

If one were to give an indication of the superlative thinkers among the Shushigaku scholars (followers of Chu Hsi) and the Yōmeigaku scholars (followers of Wang Yang-ming) during the period at the end of the Shogunate, one would have to include Hayashi Ryōsai, Yoshimura Shūyō, Yamada Hokoku, Kasuga Sen'an, Ikeda Sōan, and Higashi Takusha from the Yōmei-gaku as well as Ohashi Totsuan and the Kusumoto brothers, Tanzan and Sekisui from the Shushigaku. Most of the men were disciples of Issai, and the ones that were not were friends or associates of his disciples. Among these, some, such as Hokoku, made their reputation as great administrators, others such as Totsuan and Sen'an are known primarily as examples of loyal and faithful servants, and there were still others who, like Tanzan, held important posts in their clans and who took part in the work of the Restoration. In general, these scholars were earnestly and diligently loyal and patriotic; they were honest in their scholarship, spirited, self-disciplined, and determined to benefit their society. They were a different breed from those Confucianists of the activist group who tried to ferment a revolution in their society and loudly proclaimed the slogan "Revere the Emperor and expel the barbarian." These activists strongly argued for the preservation of the national polity and became fanatical about the concept of national purity. In contrast, the disciples of Issai

p. 151 The Chu Hsi and Wang Yang-ming Schools at the End of the Ming and Tokugawa Periods Philosophy East & West, Vol. 23, No. 1/2 (1973)

felt it was their mission to lecture on the mind and nature learning of the Sung and Ming periods and thereby clarify the Tao. This was, they thought, the primary function of a scholar. And in performing this function they attempted to correct the common prejudices of the day and deal with the country's woes. According to them, if one did not maintain a strict and self-disciplined mind and engage in faithful and diligent practice, then even acts such as these attempts to correct the defects of one's society would be basically misdirected. Although such acts would wear the label of duty at first, eventually the actual motivation and rationale for these acts would inevitably become simply a matter of authority and utility. In the end they would harm the health of the national polity, destroy the law and order of society, and contrary to the initial expectations, end by reducing the populace to a state of utter misery.

The attitude of this kind of scholar, of the Bakumatsu period (Late Tokugawa period), who tried to cure the ills of their time and deal with the century's woes is of the same heritage as the attitude manifested by the orthodox group of the Wang Yang-ming school, the Neo-Chu Hsi school, and the Neo-Wang school in the Late Ming period.

III.
Some of the Bakumatsu scholars we have discussed were followers of the teachings of Wang Yang-ming and some were followers of Chu Hsi, but all regarded both a diligent self-examination (hansei jigaku) and a deep, personal self-realization (tainin jitoku) as essential to learning, This sort of scholarly attitude had, of course, existed in the past also, but it became much deeper and thorough with these scholars. Why is it that their scholarly tone at least with respect to personal realization, reached a depth and intensity that could not have been achieved previously? The chief reasons for this would seem to be: (1) having been born into a period of troubles, both within and without the country, which had no parallel in history, they underwent deep and poignant personal experiences; (2) they imported and enthusiastically accepted the teachings of the Chu Hsi and Wang Yang-ming schools of the Late Ming period which emphasized the importance of deep personal self-realization in the midst of the same sort of chaos and misery. They thought that since the fate of the country and the well-being of the people ultimately depended on the individual's mind and disposition, the rise and fall in the popularity of the study of moral cultivation (shinsei no gaku) was importantly connected to the life pulse of the country. This meant that moral cultivation which they advocated was for them a matter of life and death -- it was something on which one wagered his life. [3] Thus it is not surprising that they concentrated on the cultivation of a

p. 152 The Chu Hsi and Wang Yang-ming Schools at the End of the Ming and Tokugawa Periods Philosophy East & West, Vol. 23, No. 1/2 (1973)

deep and thoroughgoing personal experience and self-realization. Neither is it surprising that this dedication allowed them to bequeath some of the brightest accomplishments in his history of modern Japanese thought.

As we have seen before, these scholars of the Bakumatsu period, concerned themselves with the study of Sung and Ming Confucianism, expounded on moral cultivation, and spoke of the study of life, but they all strongly warned against the pernicious tendencies toward dilettantism, arbitrary interpretation, forensic displays, and pedantry. For these reasons Ryōsai criticized the Chu Hsi school's interpretations of Ch'en Ch'ing-lan (of the Late Ming) and Lu Chia-shu of the Early Ch'ing as not being expressive of the true teachings of Chu Hsi. [4] Moreover, he rejected the exegesis of the teachings of moral cultivation and from that standpoint criticized the Chu Hsi school for falling into mere exegesis. He had high praise for the scholarship of the Yüan period scholar Wu Ts'ao-lu, who condemned the Chu Hsi-ism of Ch'en Ti-ch'i and Jao Shuang-feng. [5] Moreover, he was particularly concerned to point out the dangers of analysis since he claimed that "the evils of today are those of analysis." [6]

Shūyō took the position that reading texts and listening to lectures, that is, academic pursuits in general, constituted only the vestibule of learning and that the essence of learning was to be found in personal experience and practice. Further, he argued that the scholars of his day had erroneously taken the entrance way to be the inner sanctum. He lamented the fact that while there were many people well-versed in the exegesis of texts, they were generally ineffective. For he thought that truly effective work would not emerge merely by means of linguistic and literary studies. [7] From this standpoint he criticized the Chu Hsi interpretation of Kaneko Sōzan of the Kimon group, saying that while his scholarship was precise and detailed in the extreme and even without peer, his work lacked practical effect. [8]

Thus it goes without saying that he rejected as academic perversions facile and flashy speech, debating, memorization and "elegant essays and poetry." [9] Shūyō also criticized the Shushigaku of the silver-tongued Totsuan (who was of the same school) and Asaka Gonsai, who was literarily gifted, fond of argument, contemptuous of action, and shallow in personal realisation. [10] Sen'an, too, pointed out the dangers of being "too well read," and he lamented the fact

p. 153 The Chu Hsi and Wang Yang-ming Schools at the End of the Ming and Tokugawa Periods Philosophy East & West, Vol. 23, No. 1/2 (1973)

that scholars of the period were nothing but bookish men who did not employ self-discipline and techniques of self-examination. [11] Thus, in assessing Hoashi Banri who he had heard had a deep and extensive knowledge of the science of "investigation of things," he said, "He is completely different from his reputation; he is, in fact, said to be useless and a loafer." [12]

Of course, it goes without saying that he was critical of the work of Yasui Sokken, who was making a name for himself at the time in Edo through his commentaries on ancient texts, saying that his work was merely literary. [13] Sen'an rejected mere verbal learning and emphasized actual practice both of mind and body. [14] He rejected the Buddhist and Taoist talk of śūnya and nirvāṇa as well as meticulous exegesis of the Confucians. [15] Further, he profoundly disliked the scholarly attitude, or rather the lack of it, in Edo where any blusterer could set out his shingle, establishing himself as a self-proclaimed expert. [16]

Although Sōan did not want to abolish the practice of textual studies, he did think that textual interpretation must be done in such a way as to embody the meaning and spirit of the classical texts. Sōan rejoiced in language that facilitated the actual digestion of the material rather than complicated and abstruse theory. Even in disputes, he detested slogans and disliked excessive formality (phoniness). This is also the reason that Sōan took a critical stance with respect to the views of the Dokushi Kanken [Treatise on Reading History] by Hu ch'i-tang and Totsuan's views in his anti-Western tract, Hekija shōgen [A Short Treatise Exposing Heretical Views] and much of the work of others of the Edo school. [17]

Totsuan excelled in rhetoric, but even so he maintained that it was more important to read deeply than it was to read widely. Further he affirmed that it was only through such intensive reading and practice that one could fully penetrate into the essence of the Tao.

His disciple Namiki Rissui also thought that "wide scholarship and strong intellect" in the end became a game whose original purpose was forgotten and was inclined toward the egoistic fostering of private views. [18] In criticizing Ito Tōgai's Taikyoku zusetsu kanken [A View of the T'ai-chi T'u shuo: An Explanation of the Diagram of the Great Ultimate], he said that Tōgai had carefully studied and understood the works of the Cheng brothers and Chu Hsi

p. 154 The Chu Hsi and Wang Yang-ming Schools at the End of the Ming and Tokugawa Periods Philosophy East & West, Vol. 23, No. 1/2 (1973)

but that his not producing any new discoveries about either the Tao or Li indicated that his understanding was merely intellectual. [19]

Tanzan of the Kimon group, which emphasized the necessity of the practice of the so-called first level of innate skill (honryō ichidan), sought "to make a vow and become deeply involved." [20] He criticized the Chu Hsi school of the time, saying "Those who call themselves followers of Chu Hsi pride themselves on exegesis but in their work there is not a trace of direct, immediate practical effect." [21] Since his younger brother, Sekisui, also emphasized mental self-realization, he made use of the Hsin-ching [The Mind Classic] of the Sung scholar Chen Hsi-shan as well as the Ming "An Annotation of the Mind Classic" by Ch'eng Huang-tun. In discussing the reason that both Ching Huang-tun and Ch'iu Ch'iung-shan were not included in the Li-hsüeh chong-ch'üan [History of the Sung School of Principles] or the Ming-ju hsüeh-an [Outline of Ming Scholars], he states that the reason was because they merely trod the path of extensive knowledge and were lacking in mental self-realization. [22] For this reason Shūyō propounded his self-admonitions "Do not fall into the narrowness of exegesis; do not be sectarian; and do not depend on the vitality or strength of one's own understanding." [23]

This I think is sufficient to clarify the general situation of the period. Hereafter I will consider the central features of the teachings of both the Wang Yang-ming school and the Chu Hsi school in the Bakumatsu period in order to clarify the manner and extent of their adaptation of the teachings of the Ming scholars.

IV.
Hayashi Ryōsai's teachings can be summarized in the following. He took No-self to be the core of his doctrine and self-restraint-in-all-circumstances (in Japanese, shintoku; in Chinese, chen-tu) as the basic practice or technique. [24] Ryōsai followed the teachings of his teacher Ōshio Chūsai and Ch'ien Hsü-shan of the Wang Yang-ming school. [25] He took the essence of intuitive knowledge to be the great void. According to Ryōsai, if people would follow the promoting of their own true natural intuition (in Japanese, kyorei no dokuchi; in Chinese, tu-chih), then selfish graspings and egoism) would completely disappear, and

p. 155 The Chu Hsi and Wang Yang-ming Schools at the End of the Ming and Tokugawa Periods Philosophy East & West, Vol. 23, No. 1/2 (1973)

one would attain to selflessness. Once selflessness is attained, the energy and spirit of the totality of things would be generated spontaneously. The reason for this is that selflessness is the essence of the universe and therein resides the vital principle of the totality of things. [26] Consequently he emphasizes the technique (practice) of self-restraint. Of course, Ryōsai's self-restraint assumes a dynamic identity of nature and practice (hontai soku kufū), but in fact, he placed the greatest emphasis on practice. The practice of self-restraint, for Ryōsai, was a self-examination and reflection effected by means of the discipline of formal sitting (seiza). According to him, this was a method of extending intuitive knowledge which nurtured the vitality of the true self. [27] Thus, in addition to his fondness for the tranquility-is-primary doctrine of Lo Yü-chang, Li Yen-p'ing, and Ch'en Pai-sha as well as the tranquility doctrine of Nieh Shuan-chiang and Lo Nien-an; he also highly esteemed the self-criticism theory (jishō setsu) of Liu Nien-t'ai. [28]

He most especially had confidence in Liu Nien-t'ai's self-restraint and self-criticism, and he even had his pupils write their own "Record of Self-Examination." [29] Thus among the three sects of the Wang Yang-ming school, he favored the Tranquility school. He recognized a certain force in the claims of the Realization school, but he also was quite critical. [30] In his view the Realization school acquired a disposition toward single-minded and thoughtless actions and thus lost the central spirit of Wang Yang-ming's thought. In this way they caused the populace to harbor doubts about Wang Yang-ming's doctrine of Intuitive knowledge. [31] In the end, he comments that without relying on the "return to tranquility" of Nieh Shuan-chiang and Liu Nien-t'ai there is a tendency to treat deep insight as a mere plaything. [32]

Although Ryōsai greatly respected the Tranquility school and the teachings of Liu Nien-t'ai, he also thought there were things of value in Ku Ching-yang and Kao Ching-i of the Tung-lin school, Hsu Ching-an of the Chan Kan-ch'üan school, and the Neo-Chu Hsi school of the Late Ming. In the end, he attempted to harmonize the teachings of the Sung and Ming periods. [33] Thus, he praised the attempts of Fujiwara Seika and the Yuan dynasty scholar Wu Ts'ao-lu to reconcile Chu Hsi and Lu Hsiang-shan, [34] and thus he argued that distinctions

p. 156 The Chu Hsi and Wang Yang-ming Schools at the End of the Ming and Tokugawa Periods Philosophy East & West, Vol. 23, No. 1/2 (1973)

drawn between the teachings of Chu Hsi and Lu Hsiang-shan and between Chu Hsi and Wang Yang-ming by Ch'en Ch'ing-lan in the late Ming and Lu Ch'ia-shu in the early Ching are, in fact, deviations from the true teachings of Chu Hsi. [35]

I should like to add one more point about Ryōsai's views. Probably owing to the influence of his teacher Chūsai, he tended to give importance to the notion of filial piety and took this notion to be essential for an understanding of the true nature of the world.

Shūyō faithfully transmitted the views of his teacher Issai, and developed them in more detail. He displays great respect for Wang Yang-ming. Further he rejects the theory which equates the views of Wang-Yang-ming and Liu Nien-t'ai and which uses the latter to supplement the defects in the former. He thought that the deficiencies in the Wang Yang-ming tradition were corrected by Tsuo Tung-kuo and Ou-yang Nan-yeh of the Cultivation school. Among the followers of Wang, Shūyō considered Wang T'ang-nan and Wan Ssu-mo of the Cultivation school to have possessed great merit, but he took a different view of Liu Nien-t'ai because he had developed his own independent theories. [36] However, since he also states "Will is the unity of the not manifested and the manifest; there is no time without will (inclination). This is the storehouse of the true dharma eye of the school of Wang Yang-ming," it would be hard to say that he was not at all influenced by the sincerity of will theory (se'i setsu) of Liu Nien-t'ai. [37] Shūyō fully comprehended the main purport of Wang Yang-ming's theory of extending intuitive knowledge; that is, that original nature and practice were one, but he specifically pointed to the necessity of the practice (technique) of "extending." [38] He keenly felt the deficiencies of the excessive, mad, self-willed and arbitrary theories of Wang Lung-ch'i, Chou Hai-men, and others of the Realization school, and thus he repudiated their position which was based on original nature rather than practice. [39] Enlightenment attained in the midst of practice was, he thought, direct and immediate enlightenment while enlightenment apart from practice was madness. Thus he repudiated the notion of sudden enlightenment. [40] As he grew older, Shūyō came to feel even more deeply the evils of purely intellectual understanding, and he completely rejected the theories of emptiness, abstruse theories of nature and destiny, and the like. He came to rely almost exclusively on self-discipline and practice. Thus, for example, he says that extinguishing thought and stilling desire is the first principle of human life. [41] Further he took the

p. 157 The Chu Hsi and Wang Yang-ming Schools at the End of the Ming and Tokugawa Periods Philosophy East & West, Vol. 23, No. 1/2 (1973)

concept ching (reverence, seriousness) of the Sung scholars, when it is thought of in terms of its practical effects, to be the life blood of what had been transmitted by all the sages. Further, he thought this "reverence" could only be attained by one who had engaged in self-disciplined practice. This is the reason that Shūyō emphasized strict self-reflective practice. [42]

Why did he require these practices or techniques? He did so because he was painfully aware of the fact that the constancy of the Tao was lost through self-interest. Shūyō thought that through these techniques one could attain to true intuitive knowledge and realize the true spirit of the flow of nature which always obeys the natural principles and realize the true vital functioning of the benevolence (jen) of the unity of all things. He says that scholars merely reflect and they should not stand in opposition to things. Opposing things is the source of all pain and illness. If one is not set against things, there are no things. If there are no things, subject and object are intermixed. The sympathetic response (kannō) to this is the full expression of a mind which is everywhere one. Filial piety thus becomes filial piety of itself. Brotherly affection thus becomes brotherly affection of itself. It is not that one consciously desires either filial piety or brotherly affection. The multiplicity of things we engage in daily are in actuality one. Reflecting is nothing more than this. [43] Shūyō is truly a "scholar of the good" who deeply understood the teaching of Wang Yang-ming. This can also be inferred from his treatment of the Pulling up the Root and Stopping up the Source (Bappon sokugen ron) in the beginning of his Ōgaku teikō [The Outlines of Wang Yang-ming's Teachings].

Shūyō felt that, in addition to Ou-yang Nan-yeh and Tsou Tung-kuo of the Cultivation school, members of the Tranquility school -- Nieh Shuang-chiang, Lo Nien-an, Wang T'ang-nan, and Wan Ssu-mo -- also made valuable contributions to Wang Yang-ming's teaching, but his own thought was closest to that of the Cultivation school. Shūyō was an admirer of Wang Yang-ming, but he followed his teacher Issai in adopting a position which harmonized Wang Yang-ming and Chu Hsi. According to Shūyō, although the teachings of Wang and Chu Hsi were different on a superficial level, nonetheless they were fundamentally in agreement if one considered their practical effect. Further the task of choosing between Chu Hsi and Wang Yang-ming was simply a matter of selecting the one which best suited one's talents and inclinations. [44] Shūyō also seemed to think that this was Wang Yang-ming's own attitude. Thus while, on the one hand, he espoused Wang's teachings, on the other hand, he tried to come to a clear understanding of Chu Hsi's teachings.

He took Wang's extending of intuitive knowledge to be the primary factor in the sincerity of will and took the investigation of things to be its practical

p. 158 The Chu Hsi and Wang Yang-ming Schools at the End of the Ming and Tokugawa Periods Philosophy East & West, Vol. 23, No. 1/2 (1973)

application. According to Hōkoku it is only when it is seen in this way that Wang's extension of intuitive knowledge can avoid degenerating into some ecstatic dreamlike state; only when seen in this way can it become profound. Thus he thought that merely espousing the extension of intuitive knowledge as an ideal without attempting to put it into practice made this an empty doctrine and was to be considered as a deviation from Wang Yang-ming's basic intent. [45] His teachings are thus in agreement with those of Ch'ien Hsü-shan. Hōkoku thus felt that if one could actually attain to such a state of true sincerity, one would see the unity among such seemingly diverse teachings as Master Chou Tün-i's primacy of tranquility, Master Ch'eng Hao's maintaining of reverence, Master Lo Hsiang-shan's honoring moral nature, Matter Chu Hsi's inquiring into the Tao. They are, in other words, different paths to the same destination. [46] Hōkoku, who was called the "Little Banzan," seems to have had a fondness for the spirited leap (chōdatsu hitō) of Ch'en Lung-ch'uan. [47]

Sen'an like Shūyō, thought that the most direct and correct interpretation of Wang Yang-ming's work lay in the claim that original substance and practice were dynamically identical. [48] But he thought that this identity could not be realized except through reflective, self-examined practice and personal realization. Thus he thought that Hsü Heng-shan (1503-1583), who made use of devices of self-examination and self-discipline, was in the direct line of transmission from Wang Yang-ming and that Nieh Shuan-chiang, Lo Nien-an, and Liu Liang-feng of the Tranquility school, and Tsou Tung-kuo of the Cultivation school had also retained the essential spirit of Wang's thought. [49] In terms of temper and spirit, Sen'an resembled Wang Hsin-chai of the Realization school in many respects, but he was critical of the views of Wang Hsin-chai and Wang Lung-ch'i. [50] The man whom Sen'an most admired was the man who vigorously argued for the efficacy of self-criticism and self-restraint, and who wrote the Jen p'u - Liu Nien-t'ai. [51] According to Sen'an, Nien-t'ai had absorbed the true essence of Wang's teachings. [52] This is because his attainment of intuitive knowledge was the fruition of self-discipline. Sen'an most especially admired and defended Nien-t'ai's theory of the distinction of will and thought. He regarded this as a brilliant and important accomplishment which went directly to the core of Wang's thought. According to Sen'an, Nien-t'ai's 'absolute existence' is found in Wang's talk of the equilibrium before the emotions are aroused (mihatsu no chu). Sen'an felt that, in terms of self-realization,

p. 159 The Chu Hsi and Wang Yang-ming Schools at the End of the Ming and Tokugawa Periods Philosophy East & West, Vol. 23, No. 1/2 (1973)

theories concerning the relation of will and thought of Wang Yang-ming and Liu Nien-t'ai were absolutely the same. [53] He admired the teachings of Lu T'ung-lai, who, he thought, had also attempted to unify Wang and Liu on the basis of self-realization. On these grounds, he attempted to unify their teachings. [54]

With respect to the criticism that the Lu-Wang tradition discussed only original nature and neglected practice, Sōan maintained that this was simply not true. The Lu-Wang tradition did not deal exclusively with original nature. He argued that, in fact, it was just this tendency to be concerned with original nature and to slight practices that was a characteristic deficiency of the Cheng-Chu tradition. [55] However, he also noted that among the adherents of the Wang-Lu tradition, there is an unhappy tendency towards overweening self-confidence and excessive fogginess, and moreover they could not always extricate themselves from the influence of Zen. [56] Sōan thought of Nien-t'ai as being the one who attempted to correct these defects. [57] Sōan particularly admired the self-restraint theory of Liu Nien-t'ai. He maintained that this theory demonstrated the depth and profundity of Liu Nien-t'ai's scholarship and showed it to be directly in the mainstream of the great thinkers. [58] Thus, he said Yoshimura followed Wang Yang-ming's teachings while he himself followed Liu. Thus it is evident that he was inclined more strongly toward Liu Nien-t'ai than toward Wang Yang-ming. Sōan, who advocated strict self-reflective disciplinary techniques, thought that the incessant practical effort of Yin Ho-ti displayed Yin's earnestness and was truly admirable; he also paid heed to the Tao of ordinary daily life of Kao Ching-i of the T'ung-lin school of the Ming period. Further he highly praised the Diary of Wu K'ang-chai of the Ming, which recorded his efforts of a strict and continuous self-discipline of both body and mind in the author's day-to-day activities, and he used this diary in his lectures to apply to the problems of his own day. [59] Moreover, Sōan, like Ryōsai, thought well of Hsiao hsin-tsai bachi [Notes from the library of Mr. Caution ] written by Ku Ching-yang of the T'ung-lin school and A Record of Three Intervals by Kao Ching-i of the same school. [60] Since what Sōan was primarily seeking with the practice of self-criticism and self-restraint was a silent, tranquil practice, he regarded as most

p. 160 The Chu Hsi and Wang Yang-ming Schools at the End of the Ming and Tokugawa Periods Philosophy East & West, Vol. 23, No. 1/2 (1973)

direct and penetrating the return to tranquility and the enlightenment through formal sitting of Lo Nien-an, Nieh Shuan-chiang, Li Yen-p'ing, and Lo Yü-chang. [61] With respect to the tranquility doctrine of Nieh and Lo, he thought that this had uncovered the essence of the Doctrine of the Mean and also had rectified the deficiencies of this extension of intuitive knowledge doctrine. [62] Because he thus regarded tranquility and emptiness as primary, he had high esteem for an inner frankness and freedom. [63] With respect to profound and mysterious theories of the two Wangs of the Realization school, he recognized their value as cautionary examples, but he rejected their views because they exhibited an excess of confidence and had a bad influence upon later scholarship. [64] The reason that Sōan followed the self-restraint theory of Nien-t'ai is that it was based on the Doctrine of the Mean and that it was a practice or technique which was thorough and detailed, and further because he thought it unified the thought of Ch'eng I, Chu Hsi, Lu Hsiang-shan, and Wang Yang-ming. [65] Thus Sōan also synthesized Chu Hsi and Wang Yang-ming, harmonized Sung and Ming scholarship, and rejected sectarianism. [66]

Higashi Takusha at first used Liu Nien-t'ai's teachings to synthesize Chu Hsi and Wang Yang-ming, [67] but after the death of his teacher, Shūyō, he turned to the teachings of Wang Yang-ming. He seems to have been familiar with the excesses of the Realization school, nonetheless he seemed to have been attracted to it, and finally, attached himself to the tradition. [68] Thus in scholarship, he maintained that both enlightenment and self-confidence (that is, confidence in one's own intuitions) were necessary. [69] Broadly speaking, Takusha's interpretation of Wang Yang-ming in many respects paralleled his practice of Zen. [70]

As was related above, the Yomeigaku scholars of the Bakumatsu period generally synthesized Ch'eng, Lu, Chu, and Wang, but the Shushigaku scholars argued for a distinction between Chu Hsi and Lu-Wang tradition.

Totsuan, at first, thought that the "personal experience" (tainin) propounded by Lu and Wang was essential. Afterwards, however, his interest shifted to

p. 161 The Chu Hsi and Wang Yang-ming Schools at the End of the Ming and Tokugawa Periods Philosophy East & West, Vol. 23, No. 1/2 (1973)

Liu Nien-t'ai's theories, and eventually he became converted to Chu Hsi's teachings. In the end, he regarded as heretical the teachings of Lu and Wang, Zen Buddhism, and foreign learning, and he launched a vicious attack on all of these. He very openly raised the red flag of dispelling heresies. [71] The sharpness of his attacks reminds one of Ch'en Ch'ing-lan. In general, then, it can be said that Totsuan's Chu Hsi-ism was quite close to that of Lü Wan-ts'un and Lu Chia-shu.
Tanzan and Sekisui were trained in the Chu Hsi tradition of Yamasaki Ansai, which attempted to perfect attainment of knowledge and vigorous application. Living in reverence was the alpha and omega, the fundamental ground of all learning in this school, and they labored to experience this (realize it themselves) in all activities. [72] Tanzan expounded Chu Hsi's concept of living with reverence, which Chu Hsi had regarded as the practice of the first stage of skill. Concentration of the mind and the control of selfish desire was Tanzan's practice (technique) for the first stage of skill. Tanzan thought that when the Tao was made by this means, the problems of society would come of themselves to be solved (the Gordian knot would come of its own to meet the sword). This technique was the result of Tanzan's having passed through self-realization through formal sitting, teaching of Kao Ching-i, and his constant use of return to tranquility teachings of Chou, Lo, Chin-his, Li Lo Nien-an, and the like. The self-realization of a humane and deep knowledge achieved through formal sitting (seiza) was at the heart of Tanzan's teachings. [73] Tanzan's deep and abiding self-realization through formal sitting was far beyond most of Shushigaku scholars and the Yōmeigaku scholars of the day. It was in his later years that Tanzan made clear the subtler import of the storehouse of knowledge. He states "the boundlessness of the storehouse of wisdom is like the stillness of deep winter. There is no sound, no odor, but the whole is infused with the vibrant pulse of life." [74]

Sekisui thus urged a realization of the mind which required a practice that was to be carried out mentally and physically in all daily activities. [75] Thus, in assessing the views of Wu K'ang-chai, he said, "How many people are there who carefully study K'ang-chai today?" [76] Sekisui's view of Chu Hsi was similar to that of Lu Chia-shu and Chang Yang-yuan. [77] Thus, Sekisui was somewhat critical of the sincerity of will theory of Liu Nien-t'ai, which enjoyed a great popularity at the time, and thus, it is not surprising that in assessing

p. 162 The Chu Hsi and Wang Yang-ming Schools at the End of the Ming and Tokugawa Periods Philosophy East & West, Vol. 23, No. 1/2 (1973)

the work of Ku Ching-yang, Kuo Ching-i, Huang Tsung-hsi, and Li Erh-ch'ü he would say, "None of them are yet purified." [78] What must not be forgotten with respect to Sekisui's interpretation of Chu Hsi is that he was influenced by the atmosphere of the Kimon group and that he emphasized moral duty. [79]

Both the study of the nature and mind in the Late Ming and Early Ch'ing declined and disappeared from the scene because of the governmental policy of education of the Ch'ing dynasty, but fortunately they were imported into Japan by the scholars of the Bakumatsu period and were freshly developed and perfected there. Yet, even in Japan, because the winds of Westernization swept everything along in its path this fresh development could not help but atrophy. Most of these scholars lived until the beginning of the Meiji period, some of them lived until the beginning of the Taisho period, but all of them died lamenting the fate of their movement.

Notes:
1. Collected works of Wang Lung-ch'i, vol 1. Goroku, Bushū gikendai kaigo.

2. Takehiko Okada, Ōyōmei to mingmatsu no jugaku (Tokyo: Meitoku Press, 1970).

3. For example, Sōan's letters to Sekisui (Kusumoto family library); Sekisui's letters to Sōan (Ikeda family library); Shūyō's letters to Sōan (Ikeda family library); Seikei Shoin Zenshū Dai ni hen jō, Sōan bunshu ge.

4. Hayashi Ryōsai, Kaiseki (Hayashi family library).

5. Ibid.

6. Ryōsai's letters to Sōan (Ikeda family library).

7. Dokuga shorō bunō, Zuihitsu 75 (Yoshimura family library).

8. Shūyō's letters to Tanzan (Knusumoto family library).

9. Dokuga shorō bunō, Y. Ōshio shiki sho (Yoshimura family library).

10. Shūyō's letters to Sōan (Ikeda family library).

11. Ibid.

12. Ibid.

13. Ibid.

14. Sen'an's posthumous manuscripts, vol. 2, and Yamamoto Seiki sho.

15. Ibid., vol. 1, Risshi setsu.

16. Sen'an's letters to Sōan.

17. Sōan's letters to Sekisui (Kusumoto family library).

18. Rissui's letters to Sekisui (Ikeda family library).

19. Ibid.

20. Shūyō's letters to Tanzan (Kusumoto family library).

21. Tanzan's letters to Sōan (Ikeda family library).

22. Sekisui's posthumous manuscripts, Zuitoku roku, 3.

23. Dokuga Shorō ikō, Fuson, Goroku.

24. Seikei shoin zenshu, vol. 1, Meikaku sōwa shū, the works of Hayashi Ryōsai and Yoshimura Shuzo.

25. Hayashi Ryōsai, Saiki Tokuzan Kondō sensei Fukuron gakujutsu sho (Hayashi family library).

26. Ryōsai's letters to Sōan.

27. Jimeiken ikō [Hayashi Ryōsai's posthumous works], Jikeiroku, Rōsetsu 7; ibid., Hōsō Chūsai Daikyotaku jo; ibid., Saiki Tokuzan Kondō sensei Fukuron gakujutsusho.

28. Ryōsai's letters to Sōan (Ikeda family library).

29. Ibid.

30. Hayashi Ryōsai, Kaiseki (Hayashi family library).

31. Hayashi Ryōsai, Hōfukushitsu Tokuzansensei; ibid., Ki Tokuzan Kondōō (Hayashi family library).

32. Hayashi Ryōsai's letters to Sōan (Ikeda family library).

33. Hayashi Ryōsai, Rōsetsu, 7 (Hayashi family library); Hayashi Ryōsai, Ruiju yōgo [Introduction and Postscript].

34. Hayashi Ryōsai, Rōsetsu 7.

35. Hayashi Ryōsai, Kaiseki.

36. Dokuga Shorō ikō [posthumous works], vol. 1, Ikeda Sōan.

37. Dokuga Shorō Bunō, Essay No. 75 (Yoshimura family library).

38. Dokuga Shorō ikō [posthumous works], Fuson, Goroku.

39. Dokuga Shorō ikō, vol. 1, Ō Bunseikō denpon jo.

40. Dokuga Shorō ikō, Fuson, Goroku.

41. Ibid.

42. Ibid.

43. Ibid.

44. Dokuga Shorō bunō, Zattcho.

45. Hokoku ikō, vol. 1, Fuku Kasuga Senan. shō.

46. Ibid., Tō Kiyama Sankai shō.

47. Hokoku ikō, vol. 2, Doku Chin Ryusen shu.

48. Sen'an ikō, vol. 3, Goroku, Sen'an guhitsu.

49. Sen'an ikō, vol. 2, Yo Okamoto keishō.

50. Ibid, Yo Ikeda. Shikeisho; O Shinsai Zenshu jo.

51. Sen'an ikō, vol. 2, Ryushu Sanjin, fujo; ibid. Yo Ikeda Shikeisho.

52. Ibid., Tō Saikō Tsunekawa Ken sho.

53. Ibid., see also Yō Chujun sho.

54. Sen'an's Letters to Sōan, Sen'an ikō, vol. I, Kimu.

55. Seiki Shoin Zenshu, Dai nihen jō, Sōan bunshō, vol. 1. Batsu Chō Nanken sensei bunsho shokon.

56. Shōan's letters to Tanyan (Kusumoto family library).

57. Seiki Shoin Zenshu, Dai nihen ge, Sōan Bunshu chū, Tō Yoshimura Shūyō sho.

58. Seikei Shoin zenshu, Dai nihen ge, Sōan Dokubun, Doku Ryūshi zensho. Seikei Shoin zenshu, Dai ippen [Part 1], igyō yokō.

59. Sōan's Letters to Sekisui (Kusumoto).

60. Sōan's letters to Sekisui and Ryōsai (Hayashi family).

61. Seikei Shoin bunshu, Part I, Meikaku sōwashu, Fuku Hayashi Ryōsai sho.

62. Sōan's letters to Ryōsai.

63. Seikei Shoin zenshu Dainiken jo, Sōan bunshō 2, Ryōkaidō ki. Seikei Shoin zenshu ippen, Igyō yokō zuku.

64. Sōan's letters to Ryōsai (Hayashi family library); Sōan dokubun; Doku o Ryūkei shu.

65. Sōan's letters to Tanzan and Ryōsai. Sōan dokubun; Doku Ryūshi zenshu.

66. Sōan's letters to Ryōsai (Hayashi family).

67. Takusha zenshu, vol. 1, Chōshinroku, Part 2.

68. Ibid, Part 1.

69. Higashi Takusha Zenshu, vol. 2. Takusha bunyaku, Fuku Kusumoto Sekisui sho, Takusha's letters to Sekisui (Kusumoto family library).

70. Shū o gōhen, vol. 4, Namiki Rissui and Kusumoto Sekisui; Takase Yōjirō, Satō Issai sono monjin, p. 743; Yoshida Shōin zenshu, Nempu, section on Ansei 6.

71. Cf. Okada Takehiko, Kusumoto Tanzan.

72. Sekisui's letters to Sōan; Tanzan's letters to Sōan; Sekisui's posthumous works, vol. 5, Zō Uchida Chujun, Zō Akiyama Rasai, vol. 9, Zufukuroku 2.

73. Cf. Okada Takehiko, Kusumoto Tanzan.

74. Posthumous works of Tanzan, vol. 5, Gakushuroku 2.

75. Sekisui's letters to Sōan.

76. Ibid.

77. Sekisui's posthumous works, vol. 8, Zuitokuroku.

78. Ibid.

79. Tanzan's letters to Sekisui, Sekisui's posthumous works, vol. 8, Zuitokuroku 1, Katei Yōbun.