The Interpenetration of Stillness and Activity in Chu Hsi's Appropriation of Chou Tun-i

8/13/2019 The Interpenetration of Stillness and Activity in Chu Hsi's Appropriation of Chou Tun-i

1/15

The Interpenetration of Stillness and Activity

in Chu Hsi's Appropriation of Chou Tun-i

Association for Asian Studies

Annual MeetingBoston, 1999

Joseph A. AdlerKenyon CollegeMarch 15, 1999

(This paper has been partially incorporated into"Zhu Xi's Spiritual Practice as the Basis of his Central Philosophical Concepts")

Why did Chu Hsi (1130-1200, right) elevateChou Tun-i (1017-1073, left) to the position of

the first true Confucian sage since Mencius (4thc.BCE)? This question, which has neversatisfactorily been answered, is closely related tothe question of Chu Hsi's assessment and use ofconcepts that were generally recognized in the

Sung dynasty to be of Taoist provenance. Theconnection of these two problems was the issuedebated by Chu and the Lu brothers (Lu Chiu-shao, 1120s-1190s, and Lu Chiu-yan, 1139-1193) in a well-known exchange of letters in1186-1187. In this famous argument, Chu Hsidefended Chou Tun-i against the charge of being

too Taoist to be posthumously admitted into the Tao-hsehfellowship - much less to be considered the first truesage of the Sung. Most scholars agree that in this dialogue Chu Hsi failed to refute Lu Chiu-yan's claims thatChou Tun-i's "T'ai-chiDiagram" (T'ai-chi-t'u) had originated in Taoist circles, and that Chou's term wu-chi, inhis "Explanation of the T'ai-chiDiagram" (T'ai-chi-t'u shuo), was a Taoist term that had never been used by

Confucians (with good reason, according to Lu). Nevertheless, Chu's position eventually prevailed, and eversince then Chou Tun-i has traditionally been listed as the "founding ancestor" of the Tao-hsehmovement as

constructed by Chu Hsi. Chu may have lost the battle, but he certainly won the war. (1)

The two aspects of the problem, then, are (1) why was Chu Hsi willing to transparently try to explain awayChou Tun-i's evident debts to Taoism, and (2) why was he so intent on declaring Chou to be the first Confuciansage since Mencius? I will argue that a fuller understanding Chou Tun-i's use of Taoist and possibly Buddhistcategories is the key to his significance for Chu Hsi. I will further argue that this understanding of Chu Hsi'sappropriation of Chou Tun-i leads to a useful reinterpretation of some of Chu Hsi's central concepts. Morespecifically, I will propose that the key to Chu Hsi's evaluation of Chou Tun-i - and to his interpretation of t'ai-chi, which in this context should be translated as "Supreme Polarity" - can be found in Chou Tun-i's concept of

the interpenetration of activity and stillness (tung-ching) under the rubric of theyin-yangpolarity. This concept

provided Chu with philosophical grounding for his solution to the major issue he grappled with during the 1160s,the problem of the cultivation of the mind. His solution to this problem constituted the major turning point inChu's philosophical career. Significantly, it was just after this breakthrough that Chu began his commentaries onChou Tun-i's works.


2/15

The problem(2)

Chu's claim that Chou was the independent founder of the tao-hsehfellowship in the Northern Sung - that heapprehended the true meaning of the Confucian Way without a teacher, and passed it on to the brothers Ch'eng

Hao and Ch'eng I - was not only based on very scant evidence, it also contradicted Ch'eng I's claim that his elderbrother had himself independently perceived the Tao in the Classics. Given that the Ch'eng brothers'contributions were absolutely central to Chu Hsi's philosophical synthesis, the fact that they made virtually no

use of Chou Tun-i's teachings makes Chu's claim about Chou even more puzzling.(3)

It was similarly difficult for Chu Hsi to ignore Chou Tun-i's debts to Taoism, despite the fact that these were notwell-documented. The prevailing view concerning the T'ai-chi Diagram, in Chu Hsi's time as now, had beenformulated by Chu Chen (1072-1138), who died eight years after Chu Hsi was born. He had traced the Diagram

to the famous T'ang dynasty Taoist priest, Ch'en T'uan (10thcentury), from whom it was passed to Ch'ung Fang

(d. 1015), then to Mu Hsiu (d. 1032), and then to Chou Tun-i.(4)Ch'en T'uan had also been identified as theultimate source of the "learning of the Classic of Change" (I-hseh) among the Sung Neo-Confucians by the

followers of Shao Yung (1011-1077).(5)I-hsehwas understood to include not only the T'ai-chiDiagram butalso the use of the appendices of theIas a source of moral and cosmological insight. Chou Tun-i's majorwritings, the short "Explanation of the T'ai-chiDiagram" and the longer T'ung-shu(orI-t'ung, "Penetrating theClassic of Change"), are two of the early Sung examples of this trend toward giving theI-chinga central roleamong the textual sources of the Neo-Confucian revival.

The "T'ai-chi Diagram" itself is very similar to the "T'ai-chiPreceding Heaven Diagram" (T'ai-chi hsien-t'ient'u), which is found in the Taoist Canon and has generally been considered a T'ang dynasty precursor to Chou

Tun-i's diagram.(6)But some scholars have raised serious doubts about the dating of this diagram, so we cannot

with any certainty place it prior to Chou Tun-i.(7)Another nearly identical Taoist diagram is the "Wu-chiDiagram," which, according to the Ming scholar Huang Tsung-yen, dated back to the shadowy former HanTaoist figure, Ho-shang Kung, and also passed through Ch'en T'uan before eventually reaching Chou Tun-i. Butthe problems concerning the dating and authenticity of this diagram are at least as serious as those concerning the

T'ai-chi hsien-t'ien t'u.(8)

Another possible inspiration for Chou's diagram, or at least part of it, may be the diagram depicting thegradations of Buddhist enlightenment attributed to Tsung-mi (780-841). The dating of this too has been

questioned, and the suggestion made that it is a later addition to Tsung Mi's work. (9)In any case, the only part ofChou's diagram that it resembles is the circle composed of alternating black and white half-rings, which evolvedinto the familiaryin-yangdiagram seen everywhere today. But beyond the possible design influence, there areother possible Buddhist influences on Chou's thought -- and through him, on Chu Hsi's - to which I will return

later.

Despite what may be the impossibility of pinning down a precursor to the T'ai-chi t'u, it is nevertheless difficultto believe that Chou Tun-i constructed it out of whole cloth. The most telling objection to such a suggestion isthe fact that in his Explanation, Chou does not explain all the parts of the diagram - e.g. the two large circles atthe bottom, and the small circle connecting the phases of fire, water, wood, and metal in the middle. One wouldexpect him to fully explain a diagram that he had created. Yet we know that these elements of the diagram were

interpreted by nei-tanTaoists at least in the Sung dynasty.(10)So, whether or not its pedigree extended back to

Ch'en T'uan, and whether or not the nearly identical T'ai-chi hsien-t'ien t'uand Wu-chi t'u date back prior to theSung, it seems most reasonable to assume that Chou Tun-i received the T'ai-chi t'u, either directly or indirectly,from some Taoist practitioner(s). It also seems reasonable to assume that he was aware of the Taoist use andinterpretation of the Diagram.

"Wu-chi erh t'ai-chi"

' ' - - ' ' -


3/15

the twelfth century, when Chu Hsi and L Tsu-ch'ien (1137-1181) placed it at the head of their Neo-Confuciananthology,Reflections on Things at Hand(Chin-ssu lu), in 1175. A decade later it was the subject of theexchange of letters by Chu and the Lu brothers, mentioned above, and in fact scholars to the present day haveattempted to interpret what Chou Tun-i meant by the key terms wu-chiand t'ai-chi.

However strong the Taoist influence may have been on Chou Tun-i, it is clear that his interpretation of the

Diagram is basically Confucian, especially in the latter parts, where it places human beings at the center or apexof the natural world. In fact, if we can accept that the Diagram itself was used by Taoist practitioners prior to orduring Chou's lifetime, it is fair to say that he literally turned their interpretation on its head by reading theDiagram top-down rather than bottom-up (I will discuss this further below). Nevertheless, we are still left withthe question: What is the meaning of the enigmatic opening line, "wu-chi erh t'ai-chi"? The two key terms, wu-chiand t'ai-chi, had been primarily (t'ai-chi) or exclusively (wu-chi) Taoist terms until Chou's Explanation. Thusfor our purposes we must address two questions: how did Chou Tun-i interpret them and how did Chu Hsi. I willdeal here with both, bearing in mind that since Chu's interpretations are much more accessible than Chou's it maybe difficult to disentangle them. Nevertheless, I shall argue that wu-chi andt'ai-chiare best translated as "Non-polar(ity)" and "Supreme Polarity" for both Chou and Chu. Without wishing to beg the question, I will use these

translations in the following quoted passages.(11)

The first half of Chou's T'ai-chi-t'u shuoreads as follows:(12)

Non-polar and yet Supreme Polarity (wu-chi erh t'ai-chi)!(13)Supreme Polarity in activity generatesyang; yet at the limit of activity it is still. In stillness it generatesyin; yet at the limit of stillness it isalso active. Activity and stillness alternate; each is the basis of the other. In distinguishingyinand

yang, the Two Modes are thereby established.

The alternation and combination ofyangandyingenerate water, fire, wood, metal, and earth. Withthese five [phases of] ch'i harmoniously arranged, the Four Seasons proceed through them. The FivePhases are simplyyinandyang;yinandyangare simply the Supreme Polarity; the Supreme Polarity

is fundamentally Non-polar. [Yet] in the generation of the Five Phases, each one has its nature. (14)

The reality of the Non-polar and the essence of the Two [Modes] and Five [Phases] mysteriouslycombine and coalesce. "The Way of Ch'ien becomes the male; the Way of K'un becomes the

female;"(15)the two ch'i stimulate each other, transforming and generating the myriad things.(16)

The myriad things generate and regenerate, alternating and transforming without end.(17)

The gist of the cosmology, or philosophical cosmogony, presented by this text has been discussed and to a

certain extent agreed upon in scholarship since the the 12thcentury. Putting aside for the moment the difficulty ofthe first line, the text seems to depict a universal creative principle or force (t'ai-chi), which in some still-debated

sense is related to a negatively-stated prior or congruent state (wu-chi), and which unfolds or evolves into abipolar state of creative tension, which in turn further differentiates into the multiplicity of the phenomenal world,each particular entity of which is said to contain in full the original creative principle. The remaining portion ofthe text claims that human beings are endowed with the finest and most potent form of the fundamental psycho-

physical-energetic stuff of the cosmos (ch'i), and that the Sage represents the highest perfection of this moral,anthropocosmic potential. In Chou's other major text, the T'ung-shu, he continues, in a sense, the line of thisargument by further developing the moral psychology of the Sage, with important references back to the

cosmology of the T'ai-chi t'u shuo.(18)

On the assumptions that the Diagram was originally used in a Taoist context, that Chou Tun-i was probably

familiar with that usage, and that he may even have been sympathetic to Taoism,

(19)

in what directions mightTaoism have influenced Chou's thinking beyond the mere use of the terms wu-chiand t'ai-chi?(20)

Of the two terms, wu-chihad the stronger and more exclusively Taoist associations, appearing in the classicalTaoist texts,Lao Tzu(chapter 28), Chuang Tzu (chapter 6), andLieh Tzu (chapter 5). Wuis a negation, roughlyequivalent to "there is not;" chiis literally the ridgepole of a peaked roof, and usually means "limit" or "ultimate."


4/15

o n t ese ear y texts wu-c imeans "t e un m te ," or "t e n n te." n ater ao st texts t came to enote astate of primordial chaos, prior to the differentiation ofyinandyang, and sometimes equivalent to tao. This more

developed sense is consistent with its usage inLao Tzu28(21), and with the more general sense of wuinLao Tzuas the state of "non-existence" that precedes "existence" (yu, e.g. ch. 40) and/or is interdependent with it (ch. 2).

T'ai-chiwas found in several classical texts, mostly but not exclusively Taoist. For the Sung Neo-Confucians, the

locus classicusof t'ai-chiwas theAppended Remarks(Hsi-tz'u), or Great Treatise (Ta-chuan), one of theappendices of theI-ching: "In change there is T'ai-chi, which generates the Two Modes [yinandyang]"(A.11.5). T'ai-chihere is the source of theyin-yangprinciple of bipolarity, and is contained or inherent in theuniversal process of change and transformation.

But the term was much more prominent and nuanced in Taoism than in Confucianism. T'ai-chi was the name ofone of the Taoist heavens, and thus was prefixed to the names of many Taoist immortals, or divinities, and to thetitles of the texts attributed to them. It was sometimes identified with T'ai-i, the Supreme One (a Taoist divinity),and with the pole star of the Northern Dipper. It carried connotations of a turning point in a cycle, an end pointbefore a reversal, and a pivot between bipolar processes. It became a standard part of Taoist cosmogonicschemes, where it usually denoted a stage of chaos later than wu-chi, a stage or state in whichyinandyanghavedifferentiated but have not yet become manifest. It thus represented a "complex unity," or the unity of potentialmultiplicity. In Taoist nei-tan meditation, or physiological alchemy, it represented the energetic potential toreverse the normal process of aging by cultivating within one's body the spark of the primordial ch'i, thereby"returning" to the primordial, creative state of chaos from which the cosmos evolved. The T'ai-chiDiagram inTaoist circles, when read from the bottom upwards, was originally a schematic representation of this process of

"returning to wu-chi" (Lao-Tzu 28), i.e. returning to the "non-polar," undifferentiated state.(22)

Thus, in the major Confucian source of the term t'ai-chi(i.e. theHsi-tz'u), and in the whole complex of Taoistideas surrounding both wu-chiand t'ai-chi, the notion of polarity, based of course on the word chi, is quiteprominent. Even in the colloquial usage of chias "very" or "ultimate," the idea of the end point or extremity in acyclical (or alternating) processcarries at least the potential connotation of polarity. Since theyin-yangmodeldoes not shape our thinking as much as it did the Sung Confucians', we may be mistaken in interpreting suchideas as "end point" and "extreme" according to a linear model.

How does an interpretation of wu-chiand t'ai-chiin terms of polarity help us to make sense of Chou Tun-i'sthought? The fact that the second sentence of the T'ai-chi-t'u shuo-- where one would expect there to be aclarification of the problematic opening exclamation - immediately discusses the bipolar relationship of activityand stillness ("The Supreme Polarity in activity generatesyang; yet at the limit of activity it is still," etc.) certainlymakes sense with this model. In other words, the model makes it clear in what way the second sentence actuallyexplains the first. None of the other English translations I have seen clarifies the logical connection between the

two.(23)And a few sentences later we find:

The Five Phases are simplyyinandyang;yinandyangare simply the Supreme Polarity; theSupreme Polarity is fundamentally non-polar.

Just as the Five Phases are a further developmental stage or unfolding ofyinandyang, so tooyinandyangarethe natural expression of bipolarity, and bipolarity itself is an integral, unified concept. The direct equation of yinandyangwith t'ai-chihere is, of course, noteworthy.

So, while the polarity model works well with these passages, there is not a very large body of Chou Tun-i'swritings on which to test it. Nevertheless, it clarifies some difficulties and sheds some light on the overall picture.

Chu Hsi's case, though, is quite different. Here we have not only a much larger written corpus, but a thoroughly

worked-out system in which t'ai-chiplaces a central role, in part through its identification with li(order,principle).(24)My hypothesis, in brief, is that Chu Hsi understood t'ai-chito be the most fundamental cosmicordering principle, which is, to be specific, the principle ofyin-yangpolarity. That is, the simplest, most basicordering principle in the Chinese cosmos is the differentiation of unity into bipolarity (not duality). Wu-chi erht'ai-chi, then, means that this most fundamental principle, bipolarity - despite its evident "twoness" and its role asthe ultimate source of multiplicity - is itself, as a rational ordering principle, essentially undifferentiated. And


5/15

since any concrete instance of differentiation or polarity embodies this integral, non-polar principle, the two -non-polarity and ultimate polarity - themselves have a non-dual relationship. Hence every concrete thingembodies both polarity (as its order or pattern) and non-polarity (as the principle of that order), or differentiationand undifferentiation, or multiplicity and unity.

What I am suggesting is that the solution to the obtuseness of Neo-Confucian metaphysics - especially in the

ways in which it is commonly translated into English - may be as simple and obvious as the concept of yinandyang.(25)Let us now check this hypothesis by examining some of Chu's comments on the key terms.(26)First,his commentary on the enigmatic opening sentence of the T'ai-chi-t'u shuo:

The operation of Heaven above has neither sound nor smell," (27)and yet it is the pivot (shu-niu) ofthe actual process of creation and the basis of the classification of things. Thus it says, "Non-polarand yet Supreme Polarity!" It is not that there is non-polarity outside of the supreme polarity.

I take the word "pivot" to be significant here, especially given its prominent location in the first sentence of Chu'spublished commentary on the T'ai-chi-t'u shuo. "Shu" also happens to be the word used by Chuang Tzu, inchapter 2 of his work, where he refers to "the axis of Tao," the central point "where 'this' and 'that' have no

opposites."(28)

A more explicit statement is found in a conversation on the topic of the next few sentences of the T'ai-chi-t'ushuo(from "Supreme Polarity in activity generatesyang" to "Two Modes are thereby established"):

Within Heaven and Earth, there is only the principle of activity and stillness, in an endless cycle;there is absolutely nothing else. This is called change. And since there is activity and stillness, there

is necessarily a principle of activity and stillness. This is called the Supreme Polarity.(29)

The following passage from Chu's commentary on a line in the first section of the T'ung-shu("The alternation of

yinandyangis called the Way"(30)), combined with two comments from the Y-leion the same line, lead to the

same conclusion:

"Yin andyang" are ch'i,that which is within form [i.e. physical]. That by which there is "alternationofyinandyang" is order/principle (li), which is above form [i.e. metaphysical]. "The Way" means

the same as order/principle (li).(31)

Here the commentary defines li(not t'ai-chi) as bipolarity, and then equates taowith li. But in coversation with

his students Chu brings t'ai-chiinto the equation:

"The alternation ofyinandyangis called the Way" is the Supreme Polarity.(32)

Question on"The alternation ofyinandyangis called the Way:" Is this Supreme Polarity? Reply:Yinandyangare simplyyinandyang. The Way is Supreme Polarity - that by which there is

alternation ofyinandyang.(33)

In these passages, t'ai-chiis clearly defined as the principle of activity and stillness oryinandyang, or that bywhich (suo-i) this alternation occurs. Finally, here is Chu's published comment on the following line from section22 of the T'ung-shu:

[Chou:] The two [modes of] ch'iand the Five Phases transform and generate the myriad things. Thefive are the differentia (shu) and the two are the actualities (shih); the two are fundamentally one.Thus the many are one, and the one actuality is divided into the many. Each one of the many is

correct; the small and the large are distinct.

[Chu:] ... "The two [modes of] ch'iand the Five Phases" are that by which Heaven bestows themyriad things and generates them. From the product (mo) we can deduce the origin (pen); thus thedifferentiation of the Five Phases is the actuality of the two ch'i, and the actuality of the two ch'iin

turn is based on the polarity of the one Order (i li chih chi).(34)


6/15

The last word above, "chi," is the chiof t'ai-chi. In this sentence, it would not make any sense at all to translate itas "ultimate," "extremity," or some such. The actuality (shih) of the two ch'iis clearly based on the principle of

bipolarity, not on some vague ultimacy, all-inclusiveness, or finality.(35)

To conclude thus far: I have tried to show that the best way to interpret wu-chiand t'ai-chiin both Chou Tun-i's

and Chu Hsi's writings is by means of a model of polarity. The model is based on the literal or original meaningof the word chi, while the argument is based on the usage of the terms by both figures. Furthermore, thisinterpretation clarifies Chu Hsi's central concept of li, which in the most general sense is orderper se, and inmore specific senses refers to particular principles. The most basic of these principles is that ofyin/yang

bipolarity, called "Supreme Polarity,"(36)which in its simplest manifestation takes form as activity and stillness(tung-ching), as in Chou's philosophical cosmogony.

If Chu Hsi had simply wanted to use t'ai-chito express the idea of the ultimate (or "supreme") polarity, he couldeasily have limited himself to theHsi-tz'uappendix of theI-ching, whose Confucian authority was unquestioned(even if Confucius himself did not write it, as Ou-yang Hsiu argued). In this way he could have avoided theunpleasantness of relying so strongly on Chou Tun-i, with his dubious Taoist connections. The reason why Chu

could not do without Chou was Chou's elaboration of polarity in terms of the unquestionably Taoist concept ofwu-chi. I would propose that it was the relationship of wu-chiand t'ai-chi, and the extension of that model toactivity and stillness, that captured Chu's imagination and helped him work out the major intellectual crisis of hiscareer.

Interpenetration

The relationship between activity and stillness is outlined by Chou Tun-i in the first section of the T'ai-chi-t'ushuoand in section 16 of the T'ung-shu:

T'ai-chi-t'u shuo:

Non-polar and yet Supreme Polarity (wu-chi erh t'ai-chi)! Supreme Polarity in activity generates

yang; yet at the limit of activity it is still. In stillness it generatesyin; yet at the limit of stillness it isalso active. Activity and stillness alternate; each is the basis of the other. In distinguishingyinandyang, the Two Modes are thereby established.

T'ung-shu16: Activity and Stillness (tung-ching):

Activity as the absence of stillness and stillness as the absence of activity characterize things (wu).Activity that is not [empirically] active and stillness that is not [empirically] still characterize spirit(shen). Being active and yet not active, still and yet not still, does not mean that [spirit] is neitheractive nor still. [Chu's comment: There is stillness within activity, and activity within stillness.] For

while things do not [inter-]penetrate (t'ung),(37)spirit subtly [penetrates] the myriad things.

Theyinof water is based inyang; theyangof fire is based inyin. The Five Phases areyinandyang.Yinandyangare the Supreme Polarity. The Four Seasons revolve; the myriad things end and begin[again]. How undifferentiated! How extensive! And how endless! [Chu's comment: Substance isfundamental and unitary; hence "undifferentiated." Function is dispersed and differentiated; hence"extensive." The succession of activity and stillness is like an endless revolution. This continuityrefers to (the relationship of) substance and function. This section clarifies the ideas of the Diagram,

which should be consulted.](38)

The crucial idea for Chu Hsi is that the relationship of activity and stillness is not only temporal alternation, butalso metaphysical interpenetration. That is, since activity and stillness are polar terms, the nature of activityincludes stillness (i.e. it can only be defined in relation to stillness), and vice versa. Thus in other comments Chusays:

' '


7/15

- -

[Wu-chi erh t'ai-chi:] Calling it "non-polar" correctly clarifies (zheng) its non-spatial form. It existsprior to things, and yet at no time is it not established after the existence of things. It exists outside ofyin-yang, and yet at no time does it not operate within things. It penetrates and connects the

"complete substance;" there is nothing in which it does not exist.(39)

"The activity of Supreme Polarity producesyang" does not mean that after there is activity thenyangis produced. Rather, once there is activity, this is classified as yang; and once there is stillness,this is classified asyin. The original ground (ch'u-pen) of theyangproduced by activity is stillness.Likewise, for stillness there must be activity. This is what is meant by "activity and stillness without

end."(40)

Within the stillness ofyinis the basis ofyangitself; within the activity ofyangis the basis ofyinitself. This is because activity necessarily comes from stillness, which is based inyin; and stillness

necessarily comes from activity, which is based inyang.(41)

The material of water isyin, yet its nature is based in yang. The material of fire is yang, yet its nature

is based inyin.(42)

[On T'ung-shu16:]

Question: Things are limited by having physical form. But since human beings have stillness inactivity and activity in stillness, how can we say that they are like the myriad things? Reply:Human

beings are certainly active within stillness and still within activity, yet they are still called things.(43)

"Being active and yet not active, still and yet not still, does not mean that [spirit] is neither active nor

still" refers to the metaphysical Order (li). This Order is spiritual and unfathomable. When it is

active, it is simultaneously still. Therefore [Chou] says "no activity." When it is still, it issimultaneously active. Therefore [Chou] says "no stillness." Within stillness there is activity, andwithin activity there is stillness. When still it is capable of activity, and when active it is capable ofstillness. Withinyangthere isyin, and withinyinthere isyang. The permutations are

inexhaustible.(44)

The significance of this relationship for Chu Hsi brings us (at last?) to his life and intellectual history. The story

of the philosophical crisis he experience in the 1160s is well-known, and I will only briefly summarize it here.(45)

The issue was the relationship of the still and active phases of mind, and Chu was involved in debate on it from

1158 to 1169.(46)The significance of the issue was its relevance to methods of self-cultivation, but there was a

prior philosophical issue, namely: Is it possible for the mind, as an experiential, psycho-physical agent, toapprehend or to experience a state of total stillness? For Chu Hsi the answer was categorically negative. This wasbecause he took seriously the claim that mind is an empirical thing, a form of ch'i.Since ch'iis inherentlydynamic, by definition it cannot be totally still. What is still -- also by definition -- is the abstract principle (li) ofthe mind (or hsing, human nature).

Chang Shih (Nan-hsien) (1133-1180) was Chu Hsi's principal correspondent on this issue. Chang had been astudent of Hu Hung, who had died in 1161, and basically represented the teachings of the "Hu school" in his

dialogues with Chu.(47)On this issue, Chang and the Hu school taught that, just as one can only find liinstantiated in ch'i, so one can only establish contact with the state of stillness or equilibrium in(not "behind") theexpressed flow of psychic activity. Chu Hsi adopted Chang's position in 1167, after visiting with him for two

months.(48)But he soon felt it lacked something. He came to this conclusion, interestingly, by observing his ownpsychic state, which he describes as lacking "the quality of depth or purity" and "the disposition of ease or

profoundness," and characterized by "a sense of urgency and an absence of reserve." (49)This he attributes to hisapplication of Chang Shih's theory to his own "effort of daily self-cultivation." It had this effect because itdiverted attention too far from the stillness and equilibrium underlying activity. What was needed was a more

" "


8/15

.teaching a method of quiet-sitting that incorporated mental activity, and (2) by reinterpreting Chou Tun-i'sdoctrine of "emphasizing stillness" (chu-ching) in terms of Ch'eng I's concept of "reverent composure"

(ching).(50)

Quiet-sitting (ching-tso) was almost certainly inspired by Buddhist meditation, although most Sung Neo-

Confucians took pains to distinguish it from Ch'an sitting-in-meditation (tso-ch'an, Japanesezazen).

(51)

Quiet-sitting, in Neo-Confucian discourse, is a subcategory of "stillness," which is not limited to meditation as a distinctexercise. The question of the value and role of quietude and meditation in the Neo-Confucian life was a delicateproblem, because the Confucians were anxious to avoid the taint of the social irresponsibility they ascribed toTaoism and Buddhism, with their meditative and monastic traditions. The fact that Chou Tun-i had taught an"emphasis on stillness/quietude," and that Ch'eng Hao, Lo Tsung-yen (1072-1135), and Li T'ung (1093-1163,Chu Hsi's teacher) had taught "quiet-sitting" as a Confucian alternative to (or version of) Ch'an "sitting inmeditation" necessitated a careful and thorough examination of the correct Confucian use of quietistictechniques. According to Chu Hsi:

Quiet-sitting should not be like entering samadhiinzazen, cutting off all thoughts. Just collect themind and don't let it go and get involved with idle thoughts. Then the mind will be profoundlyunoccupied and naturally concentrated. When something happens, it will respond accordingly.When the thing is past it will return to its deep [stillness]. One must not, because of each thing, stirup two or three others. This would be confusing and without a sense of priority. How could one

achieve concentration?(52)

Chu Hsi's description of Ch'an meditation, like his accounts of Buddhist doctrines, is a caricature. His owninstruction for quiet-sitting (which is actually rather Ch'an-like) situates it in the context of responsiveness to theongoing flow of events. This should be continued even when the mind is in a relatively still phase, for totalstillness is neither possible nor desirable as an experienced state. In this way quiet-sitting was conceptuallyadapted to traditional Confucian "activism," to the philosophy of change -- the alternation of activity and stillness-- as expressed in theI-ching, and to Chou Tun-i's notion of the metaphysical interpenetration of activity andstillness. Quiet-sitting was thus distinguished from the meditation practiced by Buddhists, who allegedly placedhigher value on inactivity and complete emptiness of mind than on active engagement in ordinary affairs.

The relationship of stillness and activity was crucial to the problem of establishing the possibility of "access" bythe active mind to its static moral nature. To put this more accurately -- since the moral nature is the mind's own

inherent principle and is therefore "never separate"(53)from it -- the problem was to establish some way ofexperiencingthe moral principle informing one's activity. What Chu Hsi was seeking was a way of experiencingthe unity of the substance (stillness) and function (activity) of the mind. The non-duality of substance andfunction as general categories had been asserted by Ch'eng I in his Commentary on the I:

Substance and function have a single origin. Between the subtle and the manifest there is no gap. (54)

The problem for Chu Hsi was to discover a way of experiencing this doctrine as it applied to the mind -- a wayof putting the doctrine into practice.

In terms of the practice of self-cultivation, Chu found his solution in Ch'eng I's idea that "the effort to maintain

'reverent composure' (ching) joins the states of activity and stillness at their point of intersection."(55)Chingfunctioned as a unifying concept, providing an attitudinal (not philosophical) foundation for self-cultivation. Onecould not actually experience perfect stillness while engaging in worldly activity, but one could experience aform of composure that would comprehend stillness and activity and allow for the possibility of orienting bothphases, as a coherent whole, according to moral principle. Ching,in other words, is an experiential, attitudinalanalogue to t'ai-chiand li, comprehending stillness and activity just as licomprehendsyinandyang.

So long as in one's daily life the effort at reverent composure and cultivation (han-yang) is fullyextended and there are no selfish human desires to disturb it, then before the feelings are aroused(wei-fa) it will be as clear as a mirror and as calm as still water, and after the feelings are aroused ( i-

fa) it will attain due measure and degree without exception. This is the essential task in everyday -


9/15

.come into contact with things, this must also serve as the foundation. If we observe the state after thefeelings are aroused, what is contained in the state before the feelings are aroused can surely be

understood in silence.(56)

But Chu Hsi was never satisfied until he could establish a solid philosophical grounding for his practice. This iswhere Chou Tun-i enters the picture. Chu found in Chou's discussions of the interpenetration of activity and

stillness, based in the interpenetration or non-differentiation between wu-chiand t'ai-chi, exactly theunderpinning he needed for the methodology of self-cultivation described above. We see it, for example, in thelast sentence quoted above. He further integrates the two - Ch'eng I's concept of "reverent composure" (ching)and Chou's concept of activity and stillness - in his interpretation of section 20 of Chou's T'ung-shu. The linchpinhere is Chou's notion of "unity," which Chu relates to Ch'eng I's characterization of chingas a state of mind that

"emphasizes unity."(57)Chu Hsi further applies Ch'eng I's concept of chingto Chou Tun-i's teaching on stillnessin such a way as to minimize the latter's Taoist and Buddhist implications. Section 20 of the T'ung-shu, entitled"Learning to be a Sage" (sheng-hseh), reads as follows:

[Someone asked:] "Can Sagehood be learned?"

Reply: It can."Are there essentials (yao)?"

Reply: There are.

"I beg to hear them."

Reply: To be unified (i) is essential. To be unified is to have no desire. Without desire one isvacuous when still and direct in activity. Being vacuous when still, one will be clear (ming); beingclear one will be penetrating (t'ung). Being direct in activity one will be impartial (kung); beingimpartial one will be all-embracing (p'u). Being clear and penetrating, impartial and all-embracing,

one is almost [a Sage].(58)

Chu Hsi claims that what Chou Tun-i meant here by "desirelessness" is the same as what Ch'eng I meant bychingor reverent composure -- thus redefining in Confucian terms a proposition with obvious Buddhist

resonances(59)-- because both terms were defined in terms of unity or unification. Chu discusses two senses of

"unity" here. In metaphysical terms, he identifies unity with the Supreme Polarity inherent in the mind.(60)Interms of self-cultivation, he says that both Chou and Ch'eng interpret "unity" of mind as a "clear-sighted unity,

not a muddle-headed unity," and not "lumping everything together." (61)It is neither concentration on one thingto the exclusion of all else, nor concentration on unity and neglect of diversity.

Chu Hsi considered the state of mind described by the terms "unity" and "reverent composure" to be the spiritualbasis of both the intellectual cultivation of mind and moral activity. It is a state of composure that remains

unchanged by external stimuli and yet enables one to respond to them -- a state of fluid responsiveness.(62)Thiscondition is independent of the mind's content or activity at any particular moment. In the absence of stimuli themind characterized by reverent composure is equable and poised; when stimulated it responds immediately,because it is not preoccupied with private motivations or with fixed concentration. Since it is not preoccupiedwith anything it cannot be disturbed. Chingprovides an experiential, unchanging ground or orientation formental activity.

"Vacuous when still" [in T'ung-shu20, above] means the mind is like a clear mirror or still water.There is not the slightest bit of selfish desire added to it. Thus in its activity everything flows out

along with Heavenly principle, and there is not the slightest selfish desire to disturb it.

(63)

If things [i.e. incoming stimuli] come and get the better of it [the mind], then it is full. If it is full, itwill be obscured; if obscured then blocked. Directness in activity is simply having absolutely no

obstruction in its activity.(64)


10/15

us e qua y o e m n n s s p ase e erm nes e qua y o s ac v y -- n par cu ar s capac y or"directness in activity" or immediate, intuitive response to changing events. The purpose of "emphasizing

stillness"is to "nourish activity."(65)In this way Chu Hsi, with the help of Ch'eng I, "saves" Chou Tun-i fromTaoist and Buddhist quietism and establishes a Confucian quietism that fundamentally entails activity. This he isable to do on the basis of Chou's own idea of the interpenetration of activity and stillness.

Conclusions

Chu Hsi found in Chou Tun-i's concept of the interpenetration of activity and stillness a philosophical groundingfor the central method of self-cultivation that he developed, which was a middle ground between the "quietistic"application of Chou's thought he had learned from his teacher, Li T'ung, and the emphasis on activity and theactive, expressed mind that was taught by the Hu school, which for awhile Chu found attractive. His emphasison the non-duality of activity and stillness, or what I am calling their interpenetration, is abundantly evident in his

comments on Chou's texts. What is lacking, of course, is a smoking gun: an explicit statement to the effect thatthis is the reason for his interest in Chou Tun-i. What I have offerred here is essentially a reading of the texts thatsupports this hypothesis, but I admit that it must remain an interpretive reading - at least until a smoking gun is

found.

On the other hand, given the way in which Chu installed Chou in the "succession of the Way" (tao-t'ung),(66)itmight have been counter-productive for him to admit that Chou was in effect serving a purpose. Chu was a greatmyth-maker, and Chou played an absolutely central role in the story or myth of the tao-t'ung. As I have arguedelsewhere, Chou symbolized the "born Sage," the uniquely-endowed person who could apprehend the Tao

"with his mind alone," without reading it in texts or hearing it from a teacher.(67)In this way Chou symbolizedfor the Tao-hsehmovement the possibility of access to the ultimate truth of the Taoby independent scholars(such as many of them), outside the traditional channel of legitimation represented by the Emperor and theMandate of Heaven.

I have glossed over here some of the Buddhist implications that are evident in Chou's writing (such as the idea ofeliminating desire), of which Chu Hsi was certainly aware. In fact, it is beyond question that the entire revival ofConfucianism in the Sung -- including both the Ch'eng-Chu school and its competitors -- was influenced byBuddhism in very significant ways, e.g. the emphasis on theories of mind, the practice of meditation or "quiet-sitting" (ching-tso), the genre of the "Recorded Sayings" (Y-lu), etc. Chu Hsi occasionally used terms that hadtechnical, specialized uses in Buddhism; one example is his use of the term "non-obstruction" (wu fang-ai) --

basically synonymous with "interpenetration" -- in reference to the relationship between wu-chiand t'ai-chi.(68)

This is very close to a key doctrine in Hua-yen Buddhism: the mutual non-obstruction of principle andphenomenon (li-shih wu-ai) and the mutual non-obstruction of phenomenon and phenomenon (shih-shih wu-ai).This means that since all phenomena are empty of "own-being," therefore each fully manifests the ultimateprinciple (namely emptiness), and thus each thing fully contains the reality of every other thing (the principle of

emptiness); hence their mutual "non-obstruction." The formal structure of this argument is basically the same asthe argument I have outlined here for the interpenetration of activity and stillness.

While this kind of similarity does not prove any conscious borrowing, we must also bear in mind that the Sungdynasty was a time in which literati of all persuasions often mingled and undoubtedly learned from and

influenced each other.(69)Particularly in the Northern Sung, the distinct groupings of Taoists, Buddhists, andConfucians were not always as clear as we might assume. Chou Tun-i is a case in point, especially regardingTaoism: he may very well have studied with Taoist teachers, and it is indisputably the case that his T'ai-chiDiagram was included in the Taoist Canon. He also associated freely with Buddhist monks, especially when helived near the Buddhist sacred mountain Lu-shan. It was here that he wrote his famous poem, "On Loving theLotus" (Ai-lien shuo), which has clear Buddhist resonances. According to Ch'ao Kung-wu, citing his uncle

Ch'ao Yeh-chih (1059-1129), the Buddhist monk Shou Ya was a teacher of Chou's -- although this does not

necessarily mean that he was a significant mentor or influence. (70)

The tradition that we call Neo-Confucianism developed in dialogue not only with Sung Taoism and Buddhism,but with popular religion too. We need to take care not to become attached too strongly to the convenient


11/15

.

[Back to Handouts][Back to CV]

NOTES

1. See Hoyt Cleveland Tillman, Confucian Discourse and Chu Hsi's Ascendancy(Honolulu: University ofHawaii Press, 1992), especially ch. 9.

2. In an earlier, unpublished paper, I dealt more extensively with the background of this problem in terms ofChu's concept of the "succession of the Way" (tao-t'ung). While the background is relevant here too, I will notduplicate it. The argument of that paper was that Chou Tun-i's linkage of metaphysics and cosmology in the T'ai-chi-t'u shuoand his linkage of metaphysics and ethics or moral psychology in the T'ung-shu(Penetrating theChanges) provided, for Chu Hsi, a systematic vocabulary by which moral self-cultivation could be integratedwith his metaphysical system, based on the concepts of li(order or principle) and ch'i(psycho-physical stuff).See Joseph A. Adler, "The Mind of the Sage: Chu Hsi's Appropriation of Chou Tun-i" (presented to Association

for Asian Studies Annual Meeting, Washington D.C., April, 1992). The present paper is a further developmentalong those lines, with a more specific hypothesis.

3. Chu claimed that the T'ai-chiDiagram and its Explanation were esoteric teachings that Chou had revealed tothe Ch'eng brothers, which they were unwilling to share with their own students. Other problematic aspects ofChu's appropriation of Chou are reviewed in my above-mentioned paper, and in A.C. Graham, Two ChinesePhilosophers(1958; rpt. LaSalle: Open Court, 1992), appendix II.

4. Note that Mu died when Chou was fifteen years old, which may or may not cast doubt on the possibility ofthis transmission. They were living in the same city at the time, and the picture of an old master passing on anesoteric diagram to a bright young man who may have been sixteen suiat the time is certainly plausible. For athorough discussion of these problems see Bounghown Kim,A Study of Chou Tun-i's (1017-1073) Thought(Ph.D. diss., University of Arizona, 1996). On the point in question here, see pp. 101-102. Chu Chen's theory isfound in hisHan-shang I-chuan(Han-shang's Commentary on the Changes).

5. Ibid., pp. 105-108.

6. It is found in Shang-fang ta-tung chen-yan miao-ching t'u(Tao-tsang, vol. 196). Fung Yu-lan, inA Historyof Chinese Philosophy, vol. 2, pp. , supports the connection between the two charts, while A.C. Graham, in TwoChinese Philosophers, pp. 171-172, discounts it.

7. See Kim, op. cit., pp. 118-124.

8. Ibid., pp. 127-137.

9. See Kim, op. cit., pp. 157-160.

10. Check

11. Readers are probably familiar with the more common translations, including "The Ultimate of Non-being andalso the Great Ultimate" (Wing-tsit Chan,A Source Book in Chinese Philosophy[Princeton University Press,1963], p. 463), "The Ultimateless! And yet also the Supreme Ultimate!" (Derk Bodde's translation of Fung Yu-lan,A History of Chinese Philosophy, v. 2 [Princeton University Press, 1953], p. 435), and "It is the ultimate ofnothing which is the Supreme Ultimate" (A.C. Graham, op.cit, p. 156). My translation is closest to JosephNeedham's, "That which has no pole and yet (itself) the Supreme Pole" (Science and Civilisation in China, v. 2[Cambridge University Press, 1956], p. 460). Needham's, however, concretizes the two terms in such a way as tomiss the point that they refer to patterns or principles, not things. While Chou Tun-i is ambivalent, or rathernoncommittal, on this distincion, Chu Hsi is very clear.

12. Chou Lien-hsi chi, 1:2a.


12/15

13. Since erhcan mean "and also," "and yet," or "under these circumstances," the precise meaning of the line isfar from clear. This reading -- or perhaps: "The non-polar Ultimate Polarity!" - gives erhthe same function itevidently has in the rest of the paragraph (something like "under these circumstances").

14. In other words: seen as a whole system, the Five Phases are based on theyin-yangpolarity; theyin-yang

polarity is the Supreme Polarity; and the Supreme Polarity is fundamentally Non-polar. However, takenindividually as temporal phases, the Five Phases each have their own natures (as doyinandyang).

15.I-ching(Classic of Change),Hsi-tz'u (Appended Remarks), A.1.4. Chu Hsi, Chou-i pen-i(The OriginalMeaning of the Classic of Change) (1177; rpt. Taipei: Hualian, 1978), 3:1b. Ch'ien and K'un are the first twohexagrams, symbolizing pureyangand pureyin, or Heaven and Earth, respectively.

16. ParaphrasingI-ching, T'uancommentary to hexagram 31 (Hsien): "The two ch'i stimulate and respond inmutual influence, the male going beneath the female.... Heaven and Earth are stimulated and the myriad thingsare transformed and generated" (Chou-i pen-i, 2:1a-b).

17. Cf.Hsi-tz'u A.5.6, "Generation and regeneration are what is meant by i(change)" (Chou-i pen-i, 3:6a).

18. I am not claiming that Chou wrote the T'ung-shuafter the T'ai-chi-t'u shuo, for indeed there is nothing knownabout when he wrote either text, and suggestions have occasionally been made that he did not write theExplanation at all. Nevertheless, there are extremely significant overlaps and consistencies between the two, andlogically, if not historically, it is fair to say that the T'ung-shuis a further development of the T'ai-chi-t'u shuo.

19. Not even Chu Hsi entirely ruled out the possibility that Chou was influenced by Taoist ideas, and Chou doesbetray familiarity with Taoist texts and speaks admiringly of Ch'en T'uan in some of his poetry. See Kim, op. cit.,pp. 55-58, 74-75.

20. The following summary of Taoist ideas is based primarily on Isabelle Robinet, "The Place and Meaning of

the Notion of Taijiin Taoist Sources Prior to the Ming Dynasty,"History of Religions, 23, no. 4 (1990), pp. 373-411.

21. "Being the model for the world, he will never deviate from eternal virtue, but will return to the state of theinfinite." Trans. Chan, op. cit., p. 154, substituting "infinite" for "Ultimate of Non-being."

22. See Judith A. Berling, "Paths of Convergence: Interactions of Inner Alchemy, Taoism and Neo-confucianism,"Journal of Chinese Philosophy6 (1979), pp. 123-147; and Chang Chung-yan, Creativity andTaoism...

23. Also, I have never really understood what "Supreme Ultimate" could mean, as ultimacy would appear bydefinition to be non-qualifiable.

24. Although Yu Yamanoi argues that T'ai-chiis "an alien element in Chu Hsi's theoretical system" ("The GreatUltimate and Heaven in Chu Hsi's Philosophy," in Wing-tsit Chan, ed., Chu Hsi and Neo-Confucianism[Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1986], p. 86), I take my argument here to be a refutation of his.

25. I was first led to this observation by finding, in earlier research, that Chu Hsi's commentary on theI-chingisalmost entirely based on his attempt to retrieve theyin-yangmeanings of the original lines of the hexagrams,which had for centuries been buried under multiple layers of numerological and socio-ethical interpretations. Ihad found that Chu Hsi, the moralistic and devoted follower of Ch'eng I, had harshly criticized Ch'eng forignoring this basic level of meaning in theIand imposing his own - albeit entirely excellent and praiseworthy -socio-ethical meanings on the text. See Kidder Smith, Jr., Peter K. Bol, Joseph A. Adler, and Don J. Wyatt,

Sung Dynasty Uses of the I Ching(Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1990), ch. 6.

26. These comments are drawn both from his published commentaries on Chou's two main texts, and from hisClassified Conversations(the Chu Tzu y-lei). Both are found, compiled together, in Chang Po-hsing, comp.,Chou Lien-hsi hsien-sheng ch'an-chi(1708), contained in his Cheng-i t'ang ch'an-shu(Library of Cheng-iHall, Pai-pu ts'ung-shu chi-ch'eng edition, hereafter cited as Chou Lien-hsi chi. The sources of the statements


13/15


14/15

, . , . - .

49. Chan, Source Book, p. 602.

50. In the T'ai-chi-t'u shuo, Chou says: "The Sage settles these [affairs] with centrality, correctness, humanenessand rightness (the Way of the Sage is simply humaneness, rightness, centrality and correctness) and emphasizesstillness. (Without desire, [he is] therefore still.) In so doing he establishes the ultimate of humanity." The

parenthetical comments are Chou's own.

51. See Okada Takehiko,Zazen to seiza(Tokyo: Ofusha, 1966), and Rodney L. Taylor,The Confucian Way ofContemplation: Okada Takehiko and the Tradition of Quiet-sitting(Columbia: University of South CarolinaPress, 1988).

52. Chu Tzu y-lei(Chu Hsi's Classified Conversations), comp. Li Ching-te (1270; rpt. Taipei: Cheng-chung,1962; 3rd printing, 1970), ch. 12, pp. 345-346.

53. See Chu Tzu y-lei, ch. 1, pp. 3-4.

54.I-ch'an I-chuan(Ch'eng I's Commentary on the Classic of Change) (Ts'ung-shu chi-ch'eng ed.), Preface, p.2.

55. Trans. Thomas Metzger,Escape from Predicament: Neo-Confucianism and China's Evolving PoliticalCulture(New York: Columbia University Press, 1977) , p. 98, slightly modified. For more on chingseeGraham, Two Chinese Philosophers, pp. 67-73, and Chan, Source Book, pp. 522, 547, 593, 785. See also ChuTzu y-lei12, p. 338; Ch'ien Mu, op. cit., v.2, pp. 298-335; and Yoshikawa Kojiro and Miura Kunio, Shushi shu(Tokyo: Asahi Shinbun Sha, 1972), pp. 115-119.

56. Chu Wen-kung wen-chi, 64:29a, trans. Chan, Source Book, p. 601, with "reverent composure" substituted for"seriousness." I use "reverent composure" to convey both the religious connotations of the word (in older texts itreferred to the proper attitude with which one approaches gods and spirits) and the sense of focused attention that

the Neo-Confucians give to the word.

57.Ho-nan Ch'eng-shih i-shu(Kuo-hseh chi-pen ts'ung-shued.), p. 223. Cited in Graham, Two ChinesePhilosophers,pp. 68-70.

58. Chou Lien-hsi chi, 5:38b.

59. Although Chu Hsi, like the Buddhists, acknowledged the potential for evil (or suffering) in human desire(jen-y) he taught that desires should be not eliminated but selectively cultivated and trained to accord with theWay. Only selfish desires (ssu-y)should be eliminated. The basic Buddhist approach was to extinguish desireor "thirst" (tanha).

60. This is in his published commentary ("Unity is Supreme Polarity"). Chou Lien-hsi chi, 5:39a. In hiscommentary on the first line of section 22 of the T'ung-shuhe says, "Were it not for the perfect intelligence of theSupreme Polarity of the human mind, how would one be able to discern it?" Chou Lien-hsi chi, 6:1b.

61. Chou Lien-hsi chi, 5:39b.

62. For a discussion of responsiveness in Neo-Confucian discourse, see Joseph A. Adler, "Response andResponsibility: Chou Tun-i and Neo-Confucian Resources for Environmental Ethics," in Confucianism and

Ecology: The Interrelation of Heaven, Earth, and Humans, ed. Mary Evelyn Tucker and John Berthrong

(Cambridge: Harvard University Center for the Study of World Religions, 1998).

63. Chou Lien-hsi chi, 5:40a, statement by a student to Chu Hsi, with which he agrees.

64. Ibid., part of Chu Hsi's response to the above statement.

65. Chu Tzu y-lei, ch. 71, p .2855.


15/15

66. See my earlier paper, "The Mind of the Sage: Chu Hsi's Appropriation of Chou Tun-i."

67. Ibid. Chu was sometimes ambivalent about this, though, and occasionally admitted that Chou must havestudied with someone. Perhaps, though, he would say that of course Chou had teachers, but he did notnecessarily "hear the Way" from them. See, for example, Chou Lien-hsi chi, 5:16a.

68. "'Non-polar, yet Supreme Polarity' explains existence [polarity or differentiation] within non-existence [non-polarity or undifferentiation]. If you can truly see it, it explains existence and non-existence, first one, then theother (huo hsien huo hou), neither obstructing the other (tou wu fang-ai)" (Chou Lien-hsi chi, 1:6a).The temporality in the second sentence is perplexing, given that the first sentence seems to refer to simultaneousinterpenetration. Perhapshsienand houare not temporal terms, but something like "foreground andbackground." In any case, Chu's use of the term "non-obstruction" in this context is very close to the Buddhistconcept.

69. See, e.g., Robert M. Gimello, "Marga and Culture: Learning, Letters, and Liberation in Northern SungCh'an," in Robert E. Buswell, Jr., and Robert M. Gimello, Paths to Liberation: The Marga and itsTransformations in Buddhist Thought(Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1992), pp. 371-437.

70. See Kim, op. cit., pp. 144-145.

[Back to Writings online][Back to CV]

Documents

The Interpenetration of Stillness and Activity in Chu Hsi's Appropriation of Chou Tun-i