Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T05:24:42.292Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Place of Confucius in Communist China

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 February 2009

Joseph R. Levenson
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In Chinese Communist fashions, Confucius seems to be “in” this year. Earlier, certainly in the nineteen-twenties, revolutionaries were quite ready to see him out, and even now, in the first decade or so of the People's Republic, there are plenty of people with little patience for the sage of the old intelligence. Indeed, “despise the old” and “preserve the national heritage” have been chasing each other down the mneteen-fifties and incipient sixties, and contemporary historians, hi this area, should perhaps not dwell too seriously on trends pro and anti, so foreshortened, if discernible at all, in the foreground of our age. What seems historically significant is the range, not the petty successions, of recent Communist options in evaluating Confucius. For all the possibilities are equally modern, all plausible and consistent within a new Chinese view —an essentially anti-Confucian view informing even the pro-Confucius minds.

Type
Research Article
Information
The China Quarterly , Volume 12 , December 1962 , pp. 1 - 18
Copyright
Copyright © The China Quarterly 1962

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 For this bond of “anti-traditional” and “traditionalistic” as both non-traditional, see Levenson, Joseph R., “The Suggestiveness of Vestiges: Confucianism and Monarchy at the Last,” in Nivison, David S. and Wright, Arthur F., ed., Confucianism in Action (Stanford Un. Press, 1959), pp. 244–267.Google Scholar

2 Cf. Welch, Holmes, “Buddhism under the Communists,” The China Quarterly, No. 6 (04–06 1961), pp. 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

3 Ken-tse, Lo, Chung-kuo Wen-hsüeh P'i-p'ing Shih (History of Chinese Literary Criticism) (Shanghai: Ku-tien Wen-hsüeh Ch'u-pan-she, 1957), pp. 39, 48–49.Google Scholar

4 Tse-tsung, Chow, The May Fourth Movement: Intellectual Revolution in Modern China (Harvard Un. Press., 1960), pp. 284–287, 309–310.Google Scholar

5 Cf. Levenson, Joseph R., “The Day Confucius Died” (review article), The Journal of Asian Studies, XX, No. 2 (02 1961), p. 225.Google Scholar

6 Mo-jo, Kuo, “Kuan-yü ‘hou-chin po tal’ wen-t'i” (On the “broaden the new, narrow the old” question), People's Daily (Jen-min Jih-pao), 06 11, 1958, p. 7.Google Scholar

7 Daily Report: Foreign Radio Broadcasts, No. 248 (12 22, 1960)Google Scholar, BBB 10–11.Google Scholar

8 CCS report (07 1961).Google Scholar

9 Weekly Report on Communist China, No. 28 (06 3, 1960), p. 26.Google Scholar

10 Orleans, Leo A., Professional Manpower and Education in Communist China (Washington: National Science Foundation, 1961), p. 18.Google Scholar

11 For description and analysis of the use of Classics as sources in Communist periodisation of history, see Levenson, , “History under Chairman Mao,” Soviet Survey, No. 24 (04–06, 1958), pp. 32–34Google Scholar; Levenson, , “Ill Wind in the Well-field: the Erosion of the Confucian Ground of Controversy,” in Wright, Arthur F., ed., The Confucian Persuasion (Stanford Un. Press, 1960), pp. 268–270, 285–287Google Scholar; Feuerwerker, Albert, “China's History in Marxian Dress,” American Historical Review, LXVI, No. 2 (01 1961), pp. 336–340Google Scholar; Feuerwerker, Albert and Cheng, S., Chinese Communist Studies of Modern Chinese History (Harvard Un. Press, 1961), pp. 2–9, 21–26, 209–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

12 Mo-jo, Kuo, “Kuan-yü mu-ch'ien li-shih yen-chiu chung ti chi-ke wen-t'i,” (“Several problems concerning present-day historical research”), Hsin Chien-she, 04 1959, p. 5.Google Scholar

13 Chih-chiu, Wang and Kuo-chu, Sung, Chung-hsüeh Li-shih Chiao-shih Shou-ts'e (Handbook for History Teachers in Middle Schools) (Shanghai: Shanghai Chiao-yü Ch'u-pan-she, 1958), p. 56.Google Scholar

14 As noted, with context of “primitive communism,” in Yu-lan, Feng, “K'ang Yu-wei ti ssu-hsiang” (“The thought of K'ang Yu-wei”), in Chung-kuo Chin-tai Ssu-hsiang Shih Lun-wen Chi (Collection of Essays on Modern Chinese Intellectual History) (Shanghai: Shanghai Jen-min Ch'u-pan-she, 1958), p. 120.Google Scholar

15 Chinese Academy of Sciences, philosophical research department, history of Chinese philosophy section, ed., Chung-kuo Ta-t'ung Ssu-hsiang Tzu-liao (Materials in Chinese Utopian Thought) (Peking: Chung-hua Shu-chü, 1959), p. 1.Google Scholar For an indorsement of this position, see Ti, Ku, “K'ung-tzu ho ‘ta-t'ung’ ssu-hsiang” (“Confucius and Utopian thought”), Kuang-ming Jih-paoGoogle Scholar (hereafter KMJP), May 24, 1961, p. 2.

16 KB Ti, 2, referring to Jen Chüan, “K'ung-tzu Li-yün ‘ta-t'ung’ ssu-hsiang” (“Confucius' Li-yün utopian thought”), KMJP, May 12, 1961, p. 4. Ku Ti maintains that Confucius was unconnected with ta-t'ung (“Great Harmony”) utopianism. His article insists that in the Lun-yü (Analects), in large part a reliable source for Confucius' thought, there is no shred of ta-t'ung doctrine; and Ku Ti declines to accept the two Lun-yü extracts in the Academy of Science volume [note 15] as specimens of ta-t'ung, on the ground that the Lun-yü has non-utopian class-distinction (viz., between jen and min) built into it.

17 Chüan, Jen, p. 4.Google Scholar

18 Ming, Wang, “I-ching ho I-chuan ti ssu-hsiang t'i-hsi wen-t'i”Google Scholar (“The problem of I-ching and I-chuan systems of thought”), KMJP, 06 23, 1961, p. 4.Google Scholar

19 Feng, Kuan and Yü-shih, Lin, “Lun K'ung-tzu ti ‘jen’ ho ‘li’” (“A discourse on Confucius” jen and li”), People's Daily (07 23, 1961), p. 5Google Scholar; for jen as humanistic base of li, liberating thought from an original superstitious theology, see also Wen-fu, Chi, Ch'un-ch'iu Chan-kuo Ssu-hsiang Shih-hua (Historical Discourses on the Thought of the “Spring and Autumn” and “Warring States” Periods) (Peking: Chung-kuo Ch'ing-nien Ch'u-pan-she, 1958), pp. 20–22Google Scholar, and “Chung-nan ti-ch'ü shih-hsüeh-chieh tsai Kuang-chou chü-hsing hsfieh-shu t'ao-lun-hui” (“The historical society of the Chung-nan region holds a scholarly discussion meeting in Canton”), KMJP, 05 19, 1961, p. 2.Google Scholar

20 Tai-nien, Chang, Chung-kuo wei-wu-chü-i ssu-hsiang chien-shih (A Brief History of Chinese Materialist Thought) (Peking: Chung-kuo Ch'iang-nien Ch'u-pan-she, 1957), pp. 20, 22.Google Scholar For a more cautious discussion, locating Confucius between materialism and idealism, since he professed neither belief nor disbelief in “Heaven's decree” or “spirits,” cf. Shao-yü, Kuo, Chung-kuo Ku-tien Wen-hsüeh Li-lun P'i-p'ing Shih (A Critical History vf Classical Chinese Literary Doctrines) (Peking: Jen-min Wen-hsüeh Ch'u-pan-she, 1959), p. 28.Google Scholar

21 Jen-min Wen-hsueh Ch'u-pan-she Pien-chi-pu, ed., Shih-ching Yen-chiu tun-wen Chi (Collection of Research Papers on the Shih-ching) (Peking: Jen-min Ch'u-pan-she, 1959), p. 1Google Scholar; Kuan-ying, Yu, “China's Earliest Anthology of Poetry,” Chinese Literature, No. 3, 1962, pp. 109, 111Google Scholar; cf. Shao-yü, Kuo, p. 16Google Scholar, for Confucius recognising the Shih-ching's realism.

22 “T'an-t'ao Ghia I ssu-hsiang ho Hsin-shu chen-wei wen-t'i” (“An inquiry into Ghia I's thought and the question of the authenticity of the Hsin-shu”), People's Daily, 10 5, 1961, p. 7.Google Scholar

23 Yü-t'ung, Chou and Chih-chün, T'ang, “Wang Mang kai-chih yü ching hsüeh chung ti chin-ku-wen hsüeh wen-t'i”Google Scholar (“Wang Mang's reform and the problem of modern and ancient texts in classical scholarship”), KMJP, 05 16, 1961, p. 2Google Scholar; Yü-t, Chou'ung and Chih-chün, Tang, “Tan-t’ao Chung-kuo ching-hsüeh wen-t'i” (“An inquiry into the problem of Chinese classical scholarship”), People's Daily, 05 31, 1961, p. 7.Google Scholar

24 Lun, Hsü, Shen-mo Shih Feng-chien She-hui (What is Feudal Society?) (Shanghai: Shanghai Jen-min Ch'u-pan-she, 1954), p. 69.Google Scholar

25 Lanchow University Department of Chinese Literature, Mencius-annotation subsection, Meng-tzu I-chu (Mencius: Translation and Commentary) (Peking: Chunghua Shu-chü, 1960), p. 13Google Scholar; and similarly, “Chung-kuo Jen-min Ta-hsüeh che-hsüeh-hsi t'ao-lun Meng-tzu p'ing-chiai wen-t'i” (“The Philosophy Department of the Chinese People's University discusses the problem of evaluating Mencius”), KMJP, 07 28, 1961, p. 1.Google Scholar

26 For this reference, and others in this paragraph and the next, see Shih-cheng, Shu, “K'ung-tzu Ch'un-ch'iu” (“Confucius' Spring and Autumn”), Li-shih Yen-chiu, No. 1 (1962), pp. 47–50, 55, 57.Google Scholar

27 Shih-chien, Tai, “Wen yü tao” (“Wen and tao”), People's Daily, 01 21, 1962, p. 5.Google Scholar

28 Examples: For Confucius (a) loving the old, specifically to inculcate conservatism, cf. Tung-jun, Chu, ed., Tso-chuan Hsüan (Selections from the Tso-chuan) (Shanghai: Shanghai Ku-tien Wen-hsüeh Ch'u-pan-she, 1956), p. 8.Google Scholar (b) On the side of a declining class of masters of slaves, or a tool (with Classics) of reactionary feudal class against the people, cf. “Chung-nan ti-ch'ü shih-hsüeh-chieh …” (note 19, above), p. 2Google Scholar; “Of Confucius, Fung Yu-lan and Others,” China News Analysis, No. 398 (11 24, 1961), pp. 3, 5, 7Google Scholar; Communist China Digest, No. 17 (06 6, 1960), p. 83Google Scholar; Chi-yü, Jen, “Ho Ch'i Hu Li-yüan ti kai-liang-chu-i ssu-hsiang” (“The reformist thought of Ho Ch'i and Hu Li-yüan”), Chung-kuo Chin-tai Ssu-hsiang Shih Lun-wen chi (Collected Essaya on the History of Modern Chinese Thought) (Shanghai: Shanghai Jen-min Ch'u-pan-she, 1958), p. 86.Google Scholar (c) As an idealist and a religionist, fostering anti-materialist, anti-scientific thought, upholding traditional superstition through the doctrine of the “Will of Heaven,” with its implication that the fate of society is determined from outside society, cf. Po-ta, Ch'en, “P'i-p'an ti chi-ch'eng ho hsin ti t'an so” (“A critical inquiry into heritage and novelty”), Red Flag (Hung Ch'i), No. 13, 1959, p. 44Google Scholar; Shao-yü, Kuo, p. 19Google Scholar; Feng, Kuan and Yu-shih, Lin, “Lun K'ung-tzu” (“On Confucius”), Che-hsüeh Yen-chiu (Philosophical Research), No. 4, 07 25, 1961, pp. 54–56Google Scholar (some points in this article and others in similar vein summarised in “Of Confucius, Fung Yu-lan and Others,” p. 5)Google Scholar: Yuan-chun, Feng, A Short History of Classical Chinese Literature (Peking: Foreign Languages Press, 1958), p. 39Google Scholar; Petrov, A. A. (Shin, Li, tr.), Wang Ch'ung—Chung-kuo Ku-tai ti Wei-wu-chu-i-che ho Ch'imeng Ssu-hsiang-chia (Wang Ch'ung—An Ancient Chinese Materialist and Enlightened Thinker) (Peking: K'o-hsüeh Ch'u-pan-she, 1956), pp. iii, 73–75.Google Scholar (d) As a reformist, basically conservative, seeking to harmonise class-contradictions and prevent the rising of the poor against the governing class, cf. Li-shih-bsi, Ho-nan Ta-hsüeh, ed., Chung-kuo T'ung-shih Tzu-liao Hsüan-chi (Compilation of Materials for a General History of China) (Kaifeng; Honan Un., 1953), p. 40Google Scholar; Feng, Kuan and Yü-shih, Lin, “Lun K'ung-tzu,” pp. 46–47Google Scholar; Feng, Kuan and Yü-shih, Lin, “Lun K'ung-tzu ti ‘jen’ ho ‘li,’” p. 5.Google Scholar

It is significant that in many of these references (e.g., the last, with which compare purport of note 19), criticism of Confucius is combined with respect: both idealist and materialist elements, conservative and progressive, etc., are often noted. Cf. “Review of Reviews,” China News Analysis, No. 410 (03 2, 1962), p. 3Google Scholar, for summary of yet another article on Confucius and jen and li, with Confucius being granted at least a relative merit while at the same time his limitations (as a member of the dominant class) are noted.

29 Wen-fu, Chi, 16–17.Google ScholarCf. also Shou-su, Tu, Hsien-Ch'in Chu Tzu Ssu-hsiang (The Thought of the Pre-Ch'in Philosophers) (Sheng-huo Shu-tien), p. 6Google Scholar, and Tai-nien, Chang, p. 20Google Scholar, for Confucius as more than the progenitor of the Ju school—as the first spokesman for open, public instruction in the history of Chinese education. For an account of others' emphasis on Confucius as a pioneer non-discriminatory educator, characterised by the spirit of study and eagerness for knowledge, cf. “Of Confucius, Fung Yu-lan and Others,” pp. 2–3; and for a more grudging respect for Confucius as mildly progressive in his own day, an opinion clinched by reference to his disciples “propagating knowledge,” cf. Yuan-chun, Feng, pp. 26–27.Google Scholar

30 Pu, Chiao-yü, ed., Ti-erh-tz'u Chung-kuo Chiao-yü Nien-chien (The Second Chonese Educational Yearbook) (Shanghai: Commercial Press, 1948), pp. 205–206, 209.Google Scholar

31 Ibid., pp. 5, 8, 12, 355.

32 Cf. Shih-chieh Jih-pao (The Chinese World), San Francisco, 04 14, 1962, p. 1Google Scholar, for Chiang Kai-shek blessing a commemorative effort of the “Confucius-Mencius Society” and urging everyone to study the Sages, restore the Chinese ethic, and thereby sweep the Communists aside.

33 Yü-chang, Wu, Chung-kuo Li-shih. Chiao-ch'eng Hsü-lun (Introduction to the Teaching Pattern for Chinese history) (Shanghai: Hsin-hua Sha-tien, 1950), p. 1Google Scholar (preface), p. 8. For another suggestion, from the outside, of an appropriate link between the pro-Confucian and anti-national causes (or the anti-Confucian and anti-fascist), cf. Pound, Ezra, Impact: Essays on Ignorance and the Decline of American Civilization (Chicago: Regnery, 1960), p. 139Google Scholar: “Lady Hosie's introduction in a recent reprint tells us that the Four Classics have been relegated to University study and are no longer the main preoccupation of Chinese schools. She dates the essay 1937, which year brought the natural consequences of unusual idiocy in the form of Japanese invasion. If China had got to this point, naturally there would be an invasion, and quite naturally some Chinese would, as they do, hold the view that such an invasion is to be welcomed.”

34 For reference to Mao and Lenin on these “two cultures,” cf. Yüeh, Miu, “Chiang-shou Chung-kuo li-shih tui-yü wen-hua pu-fen ju-ho ch'u-li”Google Scholar (“How to handle the cultural portions in lecturing on Chinese history”), KMJP, 05 30, 1961, pp. 2–3.Google Scholar

35 Dru, Alexander, ed., The Letters of Jacob Burckhardt (New York: Pantheon, 1955), p. 24.Google Scholar

36 Fowke, Frank Rede, The Bayeux Tapestry: a History and Description (London: Bell, 1913), pp. 6–7.Google Scholar

37 “Of Confucius, Fung Yu-lan and Others,” p. 2.Google Scholar

38 Ibid., p. 5.

39 Shih, Wang, Yen Fu Chitan (Biography of Yen Fu) (Shanghai: Shanghai Jen-min Ch'u-pan-she, 1957), p.96.Google Scholar

40 “Ho-nan shih-hsüeh-chieh t'ao-lun Hung Hsiu-ch'üan ti ssu-hsiang yü Ju-chia ti kuan-hsi wen-t'i” (“The Historical Society of Honan discusses the thought of Hung Hsiu-ch'üan and the problem of its relationship to Confucianism”), KMJP, 06 1, 1961, p. 1.Google Scholar

41 Xaishu, Ni [Ni Hai-shu], “Lunjy” Syanji [“Lun-yü” Hsüan-i] (Selected Translations front the Lun-yü) (Shanghai: Dungfang Shudian [Tung-fang Shu-tien], 1954), pp. 1–2.Google Scholar

42 Ch'en Po-ta, p. 37. For Mao's remaries, cf. “The Role of the Chinese Communist Party in the National War,” Selected Works of Mao Tse-tung (London: Lawrence & Wishart, 1954), II, pp. 259–260.Google Scholar For another reference to Mao in this vein (“learn from the people—and learn from the ancients”), cf. Shu-shih, Tang, “A Brief Discussion on Comrade Mao Tse-tung's Contribution to Marxist Literary Style,” translated in Communist China Digest, No. 17, 06 6, 1960, pp. 84–85.Google Scholar

43 Po-ta, Ch'en, pp. 37–38.Google Scholar

44 Chieh-kang, Ku, Ch'in Han ti Fang-shih yü Ju-sheng (Taoists and Confucianists of the Ch'in and Han Periods) (Shanghai: Ch'ün-lien Ch'u-pan-she, 1955), p. 15.Google Scholar

45 Shu, Li, “Mao Tse-tung t'ung-chih ti ‘Kai-tsao wo-men ti hsüeh-hsi’ ho Chung-kuo li-shih k'o-hsüeh (“Comrade Mao Tse-tung's ‘Refonn our learning’ and Chinese historical science”), People's Daily, 06 8, 1961, p. 7.Google Scholar

46 Needham, Joseph, “An Archaeological Study-tour in China, 1958,” Antiquity, XXXIII, No. 130, 06 1959, pp. 116–117.Google Scholar

47 People's Daily, 04 8, 1962, p. 2Google Scholar; Hua-chiao Jih-pao (China Daily News), New York, 04 16, 1962, p. 1Google Scholar; Shih-chieh Jih-pao, 04 24, 1962, p. 1.Google Scholar The latter account cites Hong Kong speculation to the effect that, with a shortage of seeds for spring plowing, Mao prefers to divert attention to the Confucian associations of spring. (This does not seem to be a very powerful analysis.)

48 Huan-chang, Ch'en, K'ung-chiao Lun (On the Confucian Religion) (Shanghai, 1912), p. 27.Google Scholar

49 Cf. Glimpses of China (Peking: Foreign Language Press, 1958)Google Scholar: “Confucius (551–469 b.c.) was a famous thinker of ancient China. His teachings held sway in feudal society. Temples dedicated to him were built in various places. The one in Chufu, his native town, is the largest and houses a large number of precious cultural objects and relics.”

50 For impressions of this neglect of monuments, see Panikkar, K. M., In Two Chinas: Memoirs of a Diplomat (London: Allen and Unwin, 1955), pp. 34, 99–100.Google Scholar

51 Birch, Cyril, “Lao She: the Humourist in His Humour,” The China Quarterly, No. 8, 10–12, 1961, pp. 48–49.Google Scholar

52 MacFarquhar, Roderick, The Hundred Flowers Campaign and the Chinese Intellectuals (New York: Praeger, 1960), p. 90.Google Scholar

53 Cf. Houn, Franklin W., To Change a Nation: Propaganda and Indoctrination in Communist China (Glencoe, Ill.: Free Press, 1961), p. 7.Google Scholar

54 Wright, Mary C., “The Pre-Revolutionaiy Intellectuals of China and Russia,” The China Quarterly, No. 6, 04–06, 1961, p. 179.Google Scholar