Recently a Chinese discourse on Song Learning has been published, Chen Zhie's Discussion of the Cultural History of Northern Song

(1)

Von Angela Schottenhammer, Würzburg

Several books have already been written dealing with the his¬

tory of Song Learning (Songxue ^^). Song Learning is a very

comprehensive term which covers philosophy, religion, politics,

history, literature, arts, education and other areas of society.

Its infiuence goes far beyond only Song culture. Recently a

Chinese discourse on Song Learning has been published, Chen

Zhie's Discussion of the Cultural History of Northern

Song. The author is a student of the famous Chinese Song his¬

torian Deng Guangming sfil^t^ and is now employed at the

Institute of International Cultural Exchange of Hangzhou Univer¬

sity. He received the degree of doctor of ancient Chinese history

at Peking University.

In the author's opinion the cultural history of Northern Song

can be described as a historical development of Song Learning.

The reason for him to investigate the history of Song Learning

anew was to furnish a proof. Chen Zhie wanted to refute the view

which is very popular in China that it was Confucianism that had

caused all the problems in Chinese history because it had "mo¬

nopolized" human thought (p. 542). In his opinion, this is only

partly true. The history of Song Learning can prove something

else.

His book is not primarily written for outsiders, who simply want

to get some knowledge about the cultural history of Song China.

It is addressed to specialists of Chinese history and philosophy. I

must admit, though, that his analysis is intelligible and interesting

for non-specialists as well. What, then, makes his book worth

reading for a specialist, who is already acquainted with its con¬

tents? In his argumentation Chen Zhie brings in a point of view

which has hitherto been rather neglected in Sinologist studies on

■ Chen Zhie W'^W , Bei Song wenhuashi shulun :jt 5f: 3t ft §fe Sfi 1^ . Bei¬

jing: Zhongguo shehui kexue chubanshe 4^iS)Tü;^l4:^lijflS)li 1992.

(2)

366 Angela Schottenhammer

this subject. He proves that the history of Song Learning with its

various philosophical streams and theories has to be seen in direct

relation to the political, economical, social, military and institu¬

tional circumstances of Northern Song society. Song Learning was

modified according to the changing historical circumstances and

necessities of the Song Dynasty, as all traditional areas of Chinese

culture were more or less "confucianized". From the beginning to

the end of the Northern Song dynasty this revived Confucianism

or Neo-Confucianism was at its height. At that time Confucian

scholars for the first time in Chinese history played an important

role in political life and their theories dealt with actual problems

in society that hardly left any area of intellectual history un¬

touched. Northern Song thus became the "heyday" of cultural

history in imperial China. In his analysis of Northern Song culture

Chen Zhie never ignores the historical background. It is this

aspect of his book that I value highly.

Chen Zhie has divided his analysis into five sections: section 1

"Historical Background" (pp. 1-150), section 2 "Song Learning

and its Various Steps of Development" (pp. 151-235), section 3

"Song Learning and its Main Ideas and Contents" (pp. 236-323),

section 4 "Song Learning and Buddhism" (pp. 324-396) and sec¬

tion 5 "Song Learning and Other Cultural Levels of Northern

Song" (literature, poetry, Ci |5l-style of writing, painting and nat¬

ural sciences, pp. 397-527).

In formulating his argumentation Chen Zhie is aware of the

problem that it is unavoidable to explain things and events that

are already known. Sometimes, however, it is not easy to distin¬

guish to what extent it is necessary to explain things already

known. This is a delicate problem in his book.

I quite agree with him that the contents of Confucianism, if you

start from the original theory of Confucius, were altered according

to the political necessities not only in the Song dynasty, but

also in previous dynasties. As a result ofthe disorder in the Wudai

J^fl^-period and at the end of the Tang dynasty the early Song

emperors and the scholar-officials {shidafu ity^^^ ), he con¬

tinues, recognized that a strong central power and government

was necessary to prevent such a situation of disorder. This is why

the first scholars of Song Learning {Songxuejia ^^'^) revived

Confucian theories such as the Chunqiu ^fX, which praised the

strengthening of the imperial central power. And the emperors'

policy was to have Confucian scholars as civil officials in the

(3)

administration system, because tiiey believed such officials were

the best to implement these functions (Taizu's 'j^ft^ politics of "yi

ruchen zhi zhou PP- 25-26). They wanted to

gain back territories lost before the establishment of the Song

dynasty. The propagation of centralism and the expulsion of bar¬

barians were some essential ideas of Confucianism (p.26). In the

beginning the Song Confucianists were convinced that all the di¬

sasters in the past resulted from a lack of emphasis on Chinese

traditional culture and that it was they who actively had to revive

Chinese culture, interfere in politics and advise the governors.

Thus the antagonistic extremes of a strengthening of central

politics and intellectual freedom were fused in Song China (p.32).

It is interesting that Chen Zhie considers these two points as

antagonistic, whereas he himself proves in his analysis that they

fit together very well. Obviously he could not free himself from

traditional Chinese conceptions concerning this question.

He continues that with the increasing threat from the Qidan,

Liao and Xixia the Song Confucianists more heavily opposed

non-genuine Chinese theories and religions such as Buddhism,

and reproached e.g. the emperor Taizu with mixing up Chinese

and foreign culture. Even Chinese philosophies were repressed,

such as Daoism {Zhongguo bu wei zhongguo 4^ ^ ^ H-idea,

p.32). Not until the emperors stopped their political line of con¬

frontation did the Song scholars gradually change their opinion

and adopt elements of foreign culture, too. The scholars of Song

Learning took up all the outstanding cultural achievements of

previous dynasties, developed them further and finally put them

under "the fiag of Confucianism". In the process of development

in Northern Song the Song Learning adopted numerous ideas and

items of other schools of thought and ideological concepts. Al¬

though in the beginning of Northern Song the scholars of Song

Learning heavily opposed non-genuine Chinese ideas such as

Buddhism, they gradually adopted those that could be function-

alized for their own ideological purposes. In his opinion this pro¬

cess of development can be divided into three steps: the period

of preparation from Taizu to Zhenzong (960-1022); the period of

foundation from Renzong to Yingzong (1023-1067) and after that

the flourishing period (1068-1126).

Sections 2 and 3 deal with the terminology and the development

of Song Learning. Chen Zhie must be reproached for using too

many examples. Quotations from Song scholars and philosophers

(4)

fill pages and it is not clear that they are all necessary to prove

what he intended to show. Rather does the reader get the impres¬

sion that Chen Zhie wanted to demonstrate his erudition in

Chinese philosophy and literature. He repeats his fundamental

arguments several times, although from different points of view.

These repetitions must be traced back to the author's wish to give

his argumentation more emphasis, but it is a deficiency in struc¬

ture when writing a book.

Chen Zhie regards the extension and the strengthening of the

censoral system {taijian zhidu'^'^%\\^) as decisive factor for

the beginning of the restoration of Confucianism and the estab¬

lishment of Song Learning (p. 56). According to his opinion intel¬

lectual freedom in Song China is best refiected in the censoral

system. The Taijian was used by the Song scholars to propagate

their Confucian conceptions. Besides, Confucian ideas were

spread in literary works and in schools. But if this system was to

function for the central power, it was necessary to allow more

criticism and discussions {yilun ^ fro )• Thus it underwent sever¬

al modifications and finally led to a wide-spread atmosphere of

criticism and mistrust. The scholar-officials such as Ouyang Xiu

WiW^ (1007-1072), Fan Zhongyan fSftf^rf (989-1052), Wang

AnshÜ^S^ (1021-1086) etc., considered active interference in

and discussion of current politics as extremely important. They

gradually gained more influence in politics. This is what Chen

Zhie calls the consciousness of time {shidai jingshen^'{^j^%^)

of Song Learning.

The fact that also people with no genealogy and with a poor

family background could be recruited as officials, as well as the

economical and legal situation ofthe people, he continues, led to

a kind of sense of equality {pingdengjingshen^^^^\^) in Song

society, which had its effects on social mobility and thus produced

still more scepticism and intellectual freedom. But Chen Zhie's

definition of intellectual freedom is a delicate one. If he argues

that intellectual freedom was supposed to be functionalized for

state purposes, can he then speak of intellectual freedom? On the

contrary, does this not mean that only such things were allowed

which had positive effects on state purposes? Is it not monopo¬

lizing human thought? Chen Zhie is well aware of this problem,

but his solution is very unsatisfactory. He says that it is monopo¬

lizing human thought, but only partly. Why only partly? Because

the monopolizing of intelligence for state purposes in Song China

(5)

resulted in many new ideas, in other words, had positive effects.

This is a very biased standpoint, and no explanation of intellec¬

tual freedom. It is obviously not his intention to explain this kind

of freedom. As a consequence he then simply narrates historical

developments.

The situation had its effects on the examination system {kejii

zhiduf^\^%\\^), too. The discussion of current political prob¬

lems (ce lunp^^) became more important than simply learning

by heart the classics (tie Jing, mo yi^^M., M^)- Based on the

so-called guwen yundong '^^'M^W) ~ the candidates had to use

the traditional classics to refer to the present situation - gradually

more criticism was required in the comments on the classics (yi-

zhuan \ Sun Fu can stand as a representative). The

candidates were expected to use their own words to comment on

the classics; argumentation (yili^ B|) instead of just prose and

lyric (cizhang^^). At this time Song Learning passed over to

the period of foundation. Ouyang Xiu can be regarded as the

forerunner for the yijing^ 1^ -movement. He went a step further

than his predecessors, the yizhuanpai ^i^'^, by criticizing the

value and important role of the classics themselves. Chen Zhie

explains that because of the success of his works and his influ¬

ence on later scholars' opinions this movement was often traced

back only to Liu Chang ^\\^ (1019-1086), but in reality it had

already started with Sun Fu ^ If (998-1057). Chen Zhie sum¬

marizes Liu Chang's achievements for Song Learning in three

points: 1. "Zichu xinyi §Üj0f ^ " (to find out the proper mean¬

ing by oneselQ- 2. "Zeng zi wei shi\%'^'^ (to add characters

for explanation). 3. "Gai jing xinyi 3^ M ^ Ä " (to alter the clas¬

sics and get a new meaning).

Still more innovation was brought by the yigupai U^^M with

Li Gou $^(1009-1059), but also Hu Yuan SQig (993-1059)

and Zhang Wangzhi M-M.'^^^ famous representatives, and the

pishengpai Jit^^Jj^ [persons to be named here are e.g. Zhou

Dunyi iH[5| (1017-1073) and Shao Yong (1011-1077)].

Whereas the former believed that in the past in many cases the

classics had been interpreted in the wrong way, but still regarded

the commentaries as important knowledge, the latter did not lean

on the commentaries any longer. The pishengpai established

an independent theoretical system in order to develop its

own arguments and free opinions of the old classics. Its represen¬

tatives wanted the past to be used for the present (yi gu wei jin

(6)

(pp. 203-215). All the schools of thought just

described, however, were aiming at finding out the true content

(j'/' SSi) of the classics. On the basis of this yilixue^^^,

Chen Zhie continues, the scholars filled the classics with addi¬

tional contents. This development started between the reigns of

Renzong and Shenzong (1023-1085). The Song scholars combined

the classics with questions of life and destiny (xingming 1;^ on )

and formed the xinglixue '\^^,^. Problems of life and destiny,

however, were what Buddhism dealt with. Thus the attitude to¬

wards Buddhism became more positive and a difference was

made between religious and scientific Buddhism. The scholars

adopted concepts of Buddhism, but thought to functionalize them

for their own Neo-Confucian goals. They all quite agreed that

Buddhism was to be criticized because of its goal of individual

happiness after death and was therefore not suitable for solving

problems in society in this life.

The first representative of this xinglixue, who regarded such

problems as the essential topic, was indeed Wang Anshi. By the

times of Shenzong xingming became the central field of research

of the other schools of thought, too. The most important to

mention here are the Luoxue [Cheng Yi ggl (1033-1107)

and Cheng Hao (1032-1085)], the Guanxue [Zhang

Zai (1020-1077)] and the Shuxue [Su Shi i^$^(1036-

1101) and Su Che ^ i5: (1039-1112)]. As far as the attitude was

concerned that current problems had to be made the centre

of their theories, the scholars were in conformity with one

another. But problems in society could not be solved without dis¬

cussing the moral categories of human nature (xingqing i^i'^and

liyu^^). Where do personal characteristics and ways of con¬

duct come from? Is human nature only a prediposition of Heaven

{tiandi zhi xing ^illi^i^)? What about the disposition of the

ether {qizhi zhi x/>?^ 0,^^'(4)? Chen Zhie tries to prove that

concerning the judgement of moral categories and their ori¬

gins and concerning the differentiation of individual feelings

iqing'f^) and natural disposition {xing \^) the several schools of

Song Learning were of different opinions.

The early Wang Anshi adopted Mengzi's principle that "human

nature is good" {xing shan 'V^^). Individuals can thus be edu¬

cated and the bad desires {qing'e'\%^,) can be abolished. By the

time he came to recognize that the qing 'j*^ exists in the human

heart as xing . Xing and qing are consequences of one and

(7)

the same principle. The theory of the two origins (xing zhi er yuan

tc) can be due to Zhang Zai^Stg (1020-1077). He said

that human nature is both tiandi zhi xing and qizhi zhi xing. The

Cheng -brothers accepted Zhang Zai's theory, but developed it

further. In contradiction to Zhang Zai they regarded tiandi zhi

xing and tianli ^ jü(the Heavenly principles) to be one and the

same thing, which distinguishes human beings from animals.

They refuted Zhang Zai's idea that tianli is not a subjec¬

tive peculiarity of the individual. They introduced the term of titie

^ ii(the conformity of acting), which is formed by tianli and

renyu \ ^ (human desire). Li ^ and yu are supposed to be

considered as two different concepts. This is where the achieve¬

ment of the Cheng-brothers for the further development of Song

Learning lies. Seen from the formal point of view the Cheng-

brothers detached traditional Confucian theories about human

nature from their old concepts and replaced them by more ab¬

stract categories that were suited to the political circumstances

(pp. 256-257).

As a result of their particular political standpoints the scholars

of Song Learning were of different opinions about who was a man

of complete virtue {junzi ^^) and who was a commoner {xiao-

ren/hJ\^), what was righteous {yi^) and what was pure profit

(//^IJ). In times of increasing productivity and economy when all

the intellectuals, whether actively engaged in politics or not, did

consciously or unconsciously reflect their individual economic sit¬

uation and their individual advantages, it is indeed hard to avoid

"thinking of personal advantages" (p.272). The fact, however,

that theories on intellectual history reflect the political and

economic standpoints and interests of their authors is no peculi¬

arity of a dynasty with increasing productivity, as Chen Zhie

wants to prove. It is only a general statement about such theories

and is valid for any historical period. It is true, on the other hand,

when Chen Zhie continues that the important thing for the

scholars to do was to deliver a clear and rational explanation for

their conceptions in order to justify their own theories.

Section 4 describes in detail the theoretical dispute of scholars

with Buddhism and Daoism, which Chen Zhie regards as a kind of

"unity of the opposites" (p. 321). I agree with him that in the pro¬

cess of functionalizing Buddhist ideas for Song Learning,

Buddhism underwent a certain "secularization" (shisuhuaj^ f§ jb,

pp. 359-376). His conception, however, that the difference between

(8)

Daoism and Confucianism is not as great as between Buddhism

and Confucianism, because Daoism is as well as Confucianism

genuinely Chinese, must be called into question. He consequently

only briefly refers to Daoist ideas and theories.

As a consequence of the described development Song Learn¬

ing had its effects on other areas of society, too. These ef¬

fects Chen Zhie describes in section 5. The most important to

mention are literature (wen 'SC), poetry (shi ^) and the rising of

the Ci If-style of composing, painting (hua 2), and natural

sciences (kej'i ^4^). Changes in these fields reflect changing his¬

torical circumstances and the process of development of Song

Learning.

I greatly value Chen Zhie's method of not simply describing the

various theories of Song Learning, but always asking why they

were different and why they changed. He successfully explains

that changing ideas in the theories of Song Learning were a result

of changing political and socio-economic circumstances. His book

is a thorough study of the cultural history of Northern Song, al¬

though with shortcomings in the analytical structure.

Still, the reason for him to write this book remains a non-scien¬

tific one and, therefore, his answer as well. Chen Zhie comes to

the conclusion that it is not untrue to say that Confucianism had

to some extent monopolized human thought. But, on the other

hand, we can learn from the history of Song Learning that it had

opposite effects as well: intellectual freedom, a sense of equality,

and freedom to criticize. In his opinion the Confucianism that

"killed people" (p. 542) did not appear before Southern Song. The

question that remains to be solved and where the author appar¬

ently does not see a clear distinction is, if all the intellectuals in

Song China used this freedom only as advocates of state purposes,

this is indeed a kind of monopolizing human thought. But for

Chen Zhie this is quite irrelevant as long as the state is successful.

This is a very biased and non-scientific standpoint. Unlike 19"'

and early 20"' century China, Song society was indeed successful.

Thus, when everybody is thinking of the failures of late imperial

China and of the early 20"' century and asking for their causes,

Chen Zhie's answer is to defend good Chinese traditions in order

to tell us that not everything was bad.

(9)

Relating to Swords'

Nelly Naumann and Roy Andrew Miller

0. During tiie 2"'^ century B.C. bronze weapons, especially

swords, spearheads, and halberds, produced either in the vicinity

of northeastern China, in the Liaoning region, or in Korea, were

brought to Japan for the first time. Chiefly found in northern

Kyüshü (Fukuoka and Saga Prefectures) as grave-goods in jar-

burials, these weapons of foreign provenience must have been

tokens of the social importance of their former possessors. Copies

of these imported artifacts believed to be local "adaptations" of

older Chinese models were soon manufactured in Japan too, but

not without further alterations in their shape; most conspicuous

was the broadening of the blade, which in the end was advanced

even to the extent of inutility. This shows that by this time the

function of these weapons must have changed; and indeed these

broad blades are no longer found as grave-goods, but are instead

buried as hoards in prominent places outside the settlements. The

biggest hoard hitherto detected consists of 358 bronze swords

buried on the slope of a hill in Köjindani, Shimane Prefecture.

As to the aim or function of these hoards, whether political,

economical, or religious, nothing definitive can yet be said.

Iron artifacts appear to have found their way into Japan at

about the same time as these bronze weapons. Short, two-edged

iron swords are known from the middle of the Yayoi period (ca.

300 B. C.-300 A. D.), if only in small numbers. Here too, local

manufacturing soon set in using iron ore imported from Korea.

Thus, from the beginning of the Tumulus period (ca. 300-

' Although both authors are jointly responsible for the entire paper, the former has been the principal author of the contribution as a whole, and has especially undertaken those sections that deal with texts, mythology, and archaeology, while the latter has been particularly concerned with those sections that deal with lin¬

guistic questions.