Chapter 7: DIAGRAM OF THE
EXPLANATION OF HUMANITY
|Text of the "Diagram"||146|
|Chu Hsi's "Treatise on Jen"||147|
|The Universe as a Single Body||151|
|Jen as the Generative Life-Force||153|
|Jen as Consciousness: A Bypath||155|
|T'oegye and the Question of Jen||156|
From the earliest times, jen, humanity, has been the virtue of all virtues in the Confucian tradition. Confucius used the term to signify the highest perfection, the epitome of all human excellence. The good as such is indefinable, but it is inexhaustibly describable; thus one finds in the Analects many and varied descriptions of what is involved in jen, but no definition.
Mencius says, "Jen is to be human, " that is, it is the full perfection of the human being as such. The form of the Chinese character jen itself reflects what this means, for it is a composite of the characters for "man" and "two," i.e., two persons together. In other words, jen is the quality of relating to other persons in a proper, fully human manner, a description that reflects the Confucian conviction that the highest human excellence is cultivated in and manifested by the quality of interpersonal relationships. But it was the saying of Confucius that jen is "loving others"' and Mencius' description of jen as the quality that grows out of the innate human feeling of commiseration with the suffering of others' that set the tone for much of the later Confucian tradition: jen came to be interpreted mainly in terms of warm human fellow-feeling, or "love" in its nonsexual sense.
Thus jen is frequently translated as "benevolence, " "love, " "human-heartedness, " or "humanity." "Humanity" is perhaps the rendition best suited to the Neo-Confucian context, for it conveys the notion of the fullest human perfection and at the same time connotes the kind of warm feelings associated with jen; both of these are vital to the Neo-Confucian treatment of jen.
The Neo-Confucians preserved this heritage concerning jen. But their philosophy of principle now explicated a vision of the ultimate unity of
146 Diagram of the Explanation of Humanity
man and the universe, and a new description of man's inner life had developed from the application of the categories of substance and function to describe the relationship of the nature and the feelings in the life of the mind-and-heart. This new framework invited a new inquiry into the meaning of jen: how can jen be thought of as a cosmic quality in which man participates; what does it mean to say that jen is the substance of the mind? Addressing such questions brought a profound new development in the way of understanding jen that moved decisively beyond traditional formulations.
The materials presented in this chapter, Chu Hsi's "Treatise on Jen"' and his "Diagram of the Explanation of Jen"4 represent the height of this development. In them we find Chu Hsi's synthesis of the ideas of his predecessors and his criticism of developments that he felt were inadequate. His synthesis not only related and organized earlier ideas, but moved beyond them in terms of his own formulation of jen as "the character of the mind and the principle of love. "5 The "Treatise" was the product of some ten years' debate and reformulation; he nonetheless felt it lacked clarity concerning substance and function, a lack that he remedied with the later "Diagram," which is schematized in terms of these categories and their psychological correlative, the not-yet-aroused and aroused states of the mind' This chapter presents first the text of the diagram, and then a somewhat abridged text of the "Treatise. "
Text o f the Diagram
Master Chu says: "Humanity is the mind of Heaven and Earth whereby they produce and give life to creatures,"7 and this is what man receives as his own mind. Before [this mind] is aroused, the four virtues are complete within it, and humanity alone encompasses all four; thus it permeates and fosters these virtues as an integral whole, unifying and controlling them all. What is spoken of as "the nature to grow"8 and the principle of love is the substance of humanity.
When [the mind] is aroused and interacts [with things],
Diagram of the Explanation of Humanity 147
the Four Beginnings are manifested and commiseration alone runs throughout all four; thus it entirely flows throughout and permeates all of them, and comprehends them all. What is spoken of as the feelings of the nature and the manifestation of love is the function of humanity.
Speaking generically, the condition before [the mind] is aroused is that of substance, and the condition after it is aroused is that of function. Speaking specifically, humanity is substance and commiseration is function. Impartiality is that whereby one embodies humanity, as illustrated in the saying [of Confucius], "To overcome oneself and return to propriety is to be humane."9 For if one is impartial, then he will be humane; if he is humane, he will be loving. Filial piety and respectfulness are functions [of humanity], and altruism is the means whereby it is extended to others [in practice].10 As for [the equation of humanity with] conscious awareness, [consciousness] is what is involved in the exercise of wisdom.11
Chu Hsi's "Treatise on Jen12
And again he says: The mind of Heaven and Earth has four characteristics: they are origination, flourishing, benefiting, and firmness, and origination runs throughout all.13 As they move in rotation, we have the cycle of spring, summer, fall, and winter, and the generative force of spring runs throughout all. Therefore in the mind of man there are likewise four characteristics: they are humanity, righteousness, propriety, and wisdom, and humanity encompasses them all. When these issue forth as function, they become the feelings: they are love, respect, a sense of what is proper, and a sense which distinguishes [right and wrong], and commiseration runs throughout all of these ....
148 Diagram of the Explanation of Humanity
For humanity's constituting the Tao consists in the fact that the mind [i.e., disposition] of Heaven and Earth to produce and give life to creatures is present in everything. Before the feelings are aroused, this [disposition] is already integrally present as substance, and when they are aroused its function is inexhaustible. If one can in truth embody and preserve it, [he will find that] the wellspring of all good and the foundation of all activity is entirely present within it. This is why the teaching of the Confucian school always. urges those who would pursue learning to seek after humanity with unflagging diligence.
In the words [of Confucius] there is the saying, "To overcome oneself and return to propriety is to be humane."14 This means that if one is able to overcome and expel all of one's selfcenteredness and return to the principle of Heaven, then the substance of this mind [i.e., humanity] will be present everywhere and the function of this mind will be always operative.
[Confucius] again has said, "When dwelling at home be respectful; when handling affairs be mindful; in your relationships with others be loyal."15 This is how one preserves this mind. Again it is said, "Be filial in serving parents," "Be respectful in serving elder brothers,"16 and "Be altruistic in dealing with others."17 This is how this mind is put into practice ....
But what is this mind [of which we speak]? In Heaven and Earth it is the inexhaustible disposition to produce and give life to creatures; in men it is the warm love for others and the disposition to benefit all creatures. It encompasses the four virtues and runs throughout the Four Beginnings.
Someone said: "Master Ch'eng [I] said, `Love is a feeling and humanity is the nature; thus one may not regard humanity as love."18 In view of what you have said, is this incorrect?"
I said: Such is not the case. What Master Ch'eng said19 has to do with applying the term humanity to the active manifestation of love, while in my discussion I apply the term to the principle of love. For when it comes to the feelings and the
Diagram of the Explanation of Humanity 149
nature, although their spheres are not the same, nonetheless they communicate as an interconnected system of veins, each having its own place; how could they ever be separated and cut off as if having nothing to do with one another! I am distressed nowadays that students just recite the words of Master Ch'eng without seeking out their intention, and so come to speak of humanity as something distinctly separate from love. I have discussed this with the particular intention of clarifying his meaning; in regarding [what I have said] as differing from Master Ch'eng's explanation, is it not you who are mistaken?
Another question: "Among the disciples of the Ch'eng [brothers], there are some who take all things being as one with oneself as the substance of humanity,20 and also some who interpret humanity in terms of the mind's having conscious awareness;21 are all these incorrect?"
I said: Saying that all things are one with oneself can serve to manifest the fact that with humanity there is nothing one does not love, but it is not the actual manner in which humanity is considered as substance. Speaking of the mind's possessing conscious awareness can manifest the fact that humanity encompasses wisdom, but it is not the reality from which humanity is so termed. This is apparent if one considers Confucius' reply to the question of Tzu Kung about broadly confering benefits upon the people and saving the whole country,22 and Ch'eng I's saying that one cannot interpret humanity in terms of consciousness.23 How can you try to discuss humanity on this basis! ....
The above explanation of humanity is that given by Chu Hsi, and he also made the diagram to go with it. In ex-
150 Diagram of the Explanation of Humanity
plaining the Tao of humanity there is nothing more which could be said. The commentary section of the Great Learning says, "One who is a [true] ruler abides in humanity."24 If Your Majesty wishes to seek out what the ancient Emperors and Rulers handed down concerning the wondrous manner in which the mind embodies humanity, its meaning is exhaustively presented here.
Diagram of the Explanation of Humanity 151
The Universe as a Single Body
In our discussion of the Western Inscription in chapter 2, we saw how the unity between man and cosmos was introduced as a new and powerful foundation for Confucian ethics. Chang Tsai used the image of the universe as a single family sharing a single nature and physical being; hence he discussed jen in terms of the familial virtue, filial piety. The Ch'eng brothers went on to develop the concept of humanity in terms of each person's integral unity with all other creatures as members of a single body. Medical texts had used the term pu-jen (not jen) as a technical expression for paralysis. In a well-known and influential passage, Ch'eng Hao picked this up and used it to discuss jen in the context of the body image:
Books on medicine speak of the paralysis of the four limbs as "not-jen. " This expression is an excellent description. The man of humanity regards Heaven and Earth and all creatures as a single body; there is nothing that is not himself. Having recognized [all things] as himself, where will there be anything to which [his humanity] does not reach? But if something is not a part of the self, then it naturally is unrelated with the self. As in the case of the paralysis of the four limbs, since the vital force has ceased to run through them, they no longer belong to the self. Therefore to broadly benefit and assist all is the function of a sage.25
In his "Treatise on Jen," Chu Hsi carefully criticizes the one-body idea; not that he disagrees with the idea as such, but it is inadequate as an expression of the real substance of jen. His criticism is directed particularly at Yang Shih, who explicitly equates them: "Question: As for all things being one with oneself, is that the substance of humanity? [Yang Shih] said: It is."26
Chu Hsi's orientation is practical; he wants an expression of jen which has to do with the actual reality of the mind. If one takes the one-body idea as the literal reality of the mind, it becomes a
152 Diagram of the Explanation of Humanity
Buddhistic monism. If not that, then the idea needs further development and explication in order to become practical. Thus in the final paragraph of the "Treatise on Jen," which has been omitted by T'oegye, he says: "Furthermore, to talk about jen in general terms of the unity of things and the self will lead people to be vague, confused, neglectful, and make no effort to be alert. The bad effect-and there has been-may be to consider other things as oneself."27
A substitute for the one-body idea, as Wing-tsit Chan has noted,28 is to be found in the notion of impartiality expressed in the "Diagram". "Impartiality" means not just equal treatment, as in the English usage, but refers in the Confucian context especially to not differentiating between oneself and others, an idea closely akin to the one-body idea, but more immediate and practical. Chu Hsi's friend, Chang Shih,29 wished to directly equate impartiality with the substance of jen. Chu Hsi admits there is an intimate connection, but argues that taking impartiality as the substance of jen would in effect obscure the actual meaning of jen as a characteristic of the nature and an inherent source of love.30 He explicates his view of the matter as follows:
Jen is just the principle of love. All men have it, but sometimes they are not impartial and hence among those they should love there are some they do not. If one is impartial, then he looks upon Heaven and Earth and all creatures as forming a single body and there is nothing he does not love. But as for the principle of love, it is a principle men naturally and originally possess; it is not necessary that they first be as a single body with Heaven and Earth and all creatures and only then possess it. 31
Thus Chu Hsi in his "Treatise" and "Diagram" treats impartiality as the fundamental condition for the proper manifestation of jen as an all-encompassing love. As the famous saying of Confucius puts it, to become humane one should "overcome oneself and return to propriety"; 32 this overcoming of one's self-centeredness is, indeed, fundamental in the practical approach to cultivating in oneself the loving concern for others which manifests the humanity which comprises our nature. But the condition for its proper manifestation is not itself the substance of jen, the true source from which this loving concern issues forth.
Diagram of the Explanation of Humanity 153
Jen as the Generative Life-Force
The Book of Changes says, "To produce and give life is the great virtue of Heaven and Earth,"33 and the comments on the fu ("return") hexagram, which symbolizes the initial movement of the life force in spring, say: "In fu one sees the mind of ,Heaven and Earth."34 Humanity, as we have seen, was long correlated with origination, the issuance of life in spring. But though the stage was thus set, it was not until Neo-Confucian developments made plausible a literal connection between the generative, vital force of life and jen that we move from correlations to direct equations such as that which stands at the head of Chu Hsi's Diagram: "Humanity is the mind of Heaven and Earth whereby they produce and give life to generate creatures and this is what man receives as his own mind."
Jen is both the virtue of proper relationships and a quality inherent in the mind. The Ch'eng brothers were important sources for ideas relating the vital, generative force of the universe to both these aspects of jen. With regard to the relational aspect, the passage of Ch'eng Hao that deals with paralysis (see above, first section) was an extremely important contribution, for it went beyond the generality of speaking of one-body to specify the flow of the vital force as the operative factor of unity. Chu Hsi elaborated this as follows:
"humanity is the mind of Heaven and Earth whereby they produce and give life to creatures and this is what men and other creatures receive as their mind," means that Heaven and Earth and man and all things alike possess this mind, and its force (te) has always run throughout all. Thus although Heaven and Earth and man and other creatures each are different, nevertheless in reality there is, as it were, a single circulatory system running through them. Therefore if one personally realizes this mind and can preserve and foster it, there is nothing that the principle of the mind does not reach and one naturally loves everything. But if one's capacities are small and [this mind] is beclouded by selfish desires, then its flowing forth is cut off and there are those to whom one's love does not reach. Therefore those who can bear seeing others suffer and are without commiseration are just blocked up by selfishness and have not yet recognized the principle of their mind that
154 Diagram of the Explanation of Humanity
runs through the self, Heaven and Earth, and all creatures. Thus the essence of seeking humanity is simply a matter of not losing one's original mind.35
Impartiality, as we have seen, unblocks this vital flow, but the flow itself is the dynamic manifestation of our humanity. While this expresses the relational aspect of humanity, humanity as "the principle of love," we must turn to another image for a description of humanity as the actual substance of the individual mind, "the character (te) of the mind."36
It was Ch'eng I who provided this image. In the course of attempting to clarify how humanity is the substance of the mind, related to but not identical with its function, a student asked: "Is it like the seed of grain which must await the yang force to grow?" Ch'eng I responded: "No. The yang force's activation rather would be the feelings. The mind is like the seed of grain; its nature to grow is humanity."37 This is a new departure in the discussion of jen, drawing for the first time on a hitherto unrelated meaning of the character jen as a "kernal" or "seed." Chu Hsi reflects on it as follows:
Further, I have considered the matter in terms of I-ch'uan (Ch'eng I)'s explanation of the seed of grain: the mind is like the seed of grain, its nature to grow is humanity, and the activation of the yang force is the feelings. For what is called "the nature to grow" is the substance of humanity; its activation is the function of humanity. As for broadly benefiting and assisting all, this is the grain's bearing fruit and so it reaches men with its benefit."38
The image of the seed with its inner nature to grow is effective because it provides a way to link the understanding of the substance of the mind with the vital generative force of Heaven and Earth, and at the same time preserves the distinction between active function and quiescent substance. The seed which is not yet sprouting nonetheless encloses a very real generative vitality, its "nature to grow"; there is a clear difference between a live seed and something dead. Jen as the substance of the mind is much more than a mere empty potency; it is the inner animation of the mind that makes it not physically but morally alive and responsive to other beings.
Thus in the "Treatise" and "Diagram" there is a quite literal continuity in the pairing of jen with the generative, originating char-
Diagram of the Explanation of Humanity 155
acter of spring. Jen's encompassing all the virtues likewise is transformed; the traditional language of all virtue being a manifestation of humanity is now interpreted in terms of jen as the inner vitality of all the virtues, and one must read the traditional parallels with the seasons in a much more literal sense. In his "Jade Mountain Lecture," Chu Hsi expressed it as follows:
The word jen signifies a vitality (sheng) that totally penetrates and pervasively flows through the midst of the four [virtues]: jen is definitely the original substance of humanity; righteousness is jen's judicious ordinance; propriety is jen's appropriate adorning; wisdom is jen's discrimination. It truly is like the vital force of spring which runs throughout the four seasons: spring is the generation of vitality; summer is the growth of vitality; autumn is the reaping [of the fruits of] vitality; winter is the storing up of vitality."39
Wing-tsit Chan sums up this aspect of jen well: "Put differently, jen as a general virtue is not merely the sum total of all virtues, but the generative force that makes virtues real, social, and dynamic. In the broadest sense, it is the process of production itself."40
Jen as Consciousness: A Bypath
The final sentence of the "Diagram" negates the outright equation of jen with conscious awareness. The last portion of the "Treatise" likewise criticizes the equation of humanity and consciousness. The criticism was evoked by Hsieh Liang-tso.41 We have seen how Chu Hsi picked up on the flow of vital force as the key insight in Ch'eng Hao's passage describing paralysis as "not-jen"; the same image can also suggest that "not-jen" is somehow a matter of a severing of consciousness, which no longer pervades the whole body. Hsieh developed this aspect of the image:
When the mind has consciousness of something, it is called jen. If one is jen his mind is one with things. The fruit of plants, trees, and the five grains are referred to as jen; they are so named because they are alive. Being alive,
156 Diagram of the Explanation of Humanity
there is consciousness. The paralysis of the four limbs is referred to as "notjen"; it is so named because of the absence of consciousness. If there is no consciousness, it is dead."
On one level there is a close parallel here with jen as a generative, vital force: the comparison of the shrunken, unhealthy consciousness of the ego-centered person and the impaired sensibility of the paralytic holds true whether one interprets it in terms of an obstruction of vitality or of consciousness. But if one is literal and serious in understanding jen as consciousness, problems arise: on the one hand the emphasis upon a unitive consciousness sounds Buddhistic;` on the other, only certain forms of consciousness, such as the spontaneous alarm at seeing a child about to fall into a well, can be called jen.44 And most fundamentally, consciousness as such belongs more directly to knowing than to love, and so is the particular function of wisdom, pertaining to jen only insofar as jen is the all-encompassing animating force of all the virtues which constitute human nature.45
In fact, the element of useful insight in the equation of jen with consciousness is likewise preserved in considering jen as the vital generative power operative in wisdom; this prepares us to recognize the role of loving concern in certain forms of knowledge without the necessity of equating all knowing with loving. Thus Chu Hsi rejected this interpretation and focused instead on jen as a vital, generative force, "the nature to grow," a formulation that may mark a new development but is nonetheless also deeply rooted in traditional Confucian thought.
T'oegye and the Question of Jen
Since jen is the virtue of virtues in the Confucian tradition and the understanding of it underwent important development in the course of Neo-Confucian reflection, it is completely understandable that T'oegye includes the major exposition of the topic, Chu Hsi's "Treatise on Jen," in his Ten Diagrams. But the Ten Dia-
Diagram of the Explanation of Humanity 157
grams was intended, in the first instance, as a work for the instruction of the king, and in that context the cosmic view of jen elaborated here has a special meaning for the understanding of kingship and government. T'oegye discusses this as follows in a memorial to King Sŏnjo:
I venture to say that the great virtue of Heaven and Earth is to produce and give life. Between Heaven and Earth there is a dense multitude of living creatures; whether they be animals or plants, large or small, they are all compassionately covered and loved by Heaven. How much more is this the case when it comes to the likes of us humans, who are the most spiritual and are as the mind of Heaven and Earth! Although Heaven has this mind, it is not able itself to manifest it, but must especially favor the most sagacious, wise, and excellent, one whose virtue can unite spirits and men, and make him ruler, entrusting him with the duty of looking after [the people] in order to put its humane and loving governance into practice. (A, 6.34a, p. 190)
Apart from such practical exhortations and routine mentions of the centrality and importance of jen, however, there seems to be very little discussion of the understanding of jen in T'oegye's works. Chu Hsi's "Treatise" and "Diagram" present his final position on questions such as the substance and function of jen, jen as the character of the mind and the principle of love, and the relationship of jen to impartiality, propriety, and altruism; they also critically review other ideas regarding jen. These issues involve complexities and subtleties typical of the sort that are the subject of endless interchanges between Neo-Confucian teachers and students. But T'oegye's voluminous correspondence contains almost no significant discussion of these matters. The few passing references I have been able to find have not offered a basis for elaborating a commentary on this chapter out of T'oegye's own works.46
T'oegye was certainly well aware of not only the "Treatise" and "Diagram," but also the whole discussion and debate out of which they emerged. This is evidenced by his Chu sŏ chŏryŏ, a selection of about one-third of Chu Hsi's letters, which includes a judicious selection of portions of Chu Hsi's most important correspondence relating to the "Treatise."47 To what extent he used Chu Hsi's discussion ofjen in his teaching is unclear. It does seem evident, however, that
158 Diagram of the Explanation of Humanity
in the intellectual world of his time the topic as developed in the "Treatise" and "Diagram" was not problematic. In over 2,000 pages of T'oegye's letters I have found only one minor question directly relating to this material, and T'oegye settles it in two lines.48
What conclusions one may draw from this is uncertain. Perhaps it reflects the success of Chu Hsi's analysis and formulation of the meaning of jen. Out of the welter of classical descriptions of jen he wrought a complex but very precise and systematic analysis in terms of the substance-function structure of the mind-and-heart; he also critically reviewed the new avenues explored by earlier Neo-Confucians and brought these developments to a sharp focus in his formulation of jen as the principle of love and the character of the mind. The reasoning which supports his position is presented with clarity, consistency, and precision in his correspondence, particularly in his letters to Chang Shih.49 If one accepts his basic premises, there are no obvious loose ends or contradictory expressions to be cleared up in Chu Hsi's final explication of jen.
This does not mean that the full meaning of the "Treatise" and "Diagram" is simple and easy to understand; they have a history and inner rational which must be examined and carefully considered. But other major aspects of the Ch'eng-Chu school of thought, such as the relationship of activity and quiet or study and practice with regard to self-cultivation, or the relationship of principle and material force with regard to understanding the cosmos and the human psyche, involve dialectical tensions that result in differing and sometimes apparently contradictory statements being made from varied perspectives. These provided Koreans obvious material for questions, debate, and further development. As for Chu Hsi's discussion of jen, perhaps we can take the comment with which T'oegye concludes this chapter at face value: "In explaining the Tao of humanity there is nothing more which could be said."
7. Diagram of the Explanation of Humanity
1. Analects, 12:22.
2. Mencius, 2A:6.
3. The "Treatise" (Jen shuo) is to be found in ChuTzu ta-ch'üan, 67.206216. For an English translation, see Wing-tsit Chan, Sourcebook, pp. 593-597.
4. The "Diagram" appears in Yü-lei, 105.71a. The "Treatise" and the "Diagram" appear together in HLTC 35.ba-Sb.
5. Wing-tsit Chan notes that this formulation is central in Chu Hsi's treatment of jen, and appears in over ten places in his notes on the Analects and Mencius, including Analects 1:2 and Mencius IA:1. See Wing-tsit Chan (Chen Jung-chieh), "Lün Chu-tzu chih jen-shuo" (Discussion of Chu Hsi's Treatise on Jen).
6. See ibid., p. 391, where Chan discusses the "Diagram".
7. A saying of Ch'eng I: Wai-shu, 3.1a. Sheng, here rendered "produce and give life," means life, the generation of life, or production. The idea of the universe here is one of a dynamic, vital organism which continually produces new life and also functions to support and foster it through the whole process of growth and fruition, a concept that becomes central in the Neo-Confucian interpretation of jen. See discussion below, Commentary, "Jen as the Generative Life-Force."
8. From Ch'eng I's comparison of the mind with a seed, and jen as its nature to grow: I-shu, 18.2a. See discussion below, Commentary, "]en as the Generative Life-Force. "
9. Analects, 12.1. Chou Tun-i attempted to equate jen with impartiality, but while the two are closely connected, impartiality is only a state of consciousness and does not do justice to the social, relational nature of jen; thus Chu Hsi here connects them but avoids equating them. See Wing-tsit Chan, "The Evolution of the Neo-Confucian Concept of Jen," pp. 311-312.
10. This follows Ch'eng I's description of the relationship of filial piety, respectfulness, and altruism to jen: I-shu, 18.16 and 15.86. One sees here how the Neo-Confucian categories of substance and function serve to give a systematic order to the many ideas that were traditionally closely associated with or equated with jen.
11. T'oegye's text has chih ("know") instead of the very similar character, chih ("wisdom") which appears in both the HLTC and the Chu Tzu ta-ch'üan. I have followed the latter meaning. The variant reading would not alter the point of the comment, which is a critique of Hsieh Liang-tso's attempt to interpret jen as consciousness (see discussion below, Commentary, "Jen as consciousness. Chu Hsi says that consciousness is the function of wisdom, and related to jen insofar as jen encompasses the other virtues of the natures, including wisdom; hence it is a distortion to use it as a direct manifestation of jen (see CTTC, 42.19a-b, Letter to Wu HuI-shu)
12. T'oegye has shortened the original text of the Treatise by 301 characters (the original text totals 824 characters). What he has omitted is either already clear in the Diagram, or an embellishment rather than a main idea, or, in the case of the final paragraph which he omitted, an expansion on the difficulties which attend the interpretations of Hsieh Liang-tso and Yang Shih. His intention to shorten the text is clear from the manner in which he omits even inessential pronouns and short phrases that do not alter the basic meaning or coherence of the text. His need to do this undoubtedly stemmed from his intention to produce a text each chapter of which could be mounted on a single panel of a ten-panel screen. The text of this chapter, in its shortened form, can just be fit into such a format. The same considerations are also probably the reason for the very abbreviated nature of T'oegye's own remarks in this chapter.
13. Changes, Hexagram number 1, Ch'ien (Heaven).
14. Analects, 12:1.
15. Analects, 13:19.
16. Both of these sayings come from the Classic of Filial Piety, ch. 14.
17. A paraphrase of I-shu, 11.56.
18. I-shu, 18.1a.
19. Instead of "said," (wei), the text in Chu Tzu ta-ch'üan reads "criticized" (he); the text in HLTC, however, like T'oegye, has wei.
20. This refers to the doctrine of Yang Shih. See discussion, Commentary, "The Universe as a Single Body."
21. This refers to Hsieh Liang-tso. See discussion, below, Commentary, " Jen as Consciousness."
22. Analects, 6:30.
23. I-shu, 24.3a.
24. Great Learning, commentary section, ch. 3.
25. I-shu, ZA.2a.
26. HLTC, 35.76, annotation to text of Treatise.
27. Wing-tsit Chan tr., Sourcebook, p. 596.
28. Chan, "Lun Chu-tzu jen-shuo," p. 391.
29. The courtesy name of Chang Shih (1133-1180) was Chin-fu (or Ching-fu), and his honorific name was Nan-hsien. He was an illustrious scholar and a close friend of Chu Hsi. Chi Hsi formulated his "Treatise" in the context of an ongoing discussion and debate on the issues with Chang. The most important letters dealing directly with the "Treatise" are to be found in CTTC, 32.16b-21b.
30. CTTC, 32.19a, Letter to Chang Chin-fu).
31. C77C, 32.21a.
32. Analects, 12:1.
33. Changes, Appended Remarks, pt. 2, ch. 1.
34. Changes, Hexagram no. 24, fu (return).
35. Yŭ-lei, 95.86-9a.
36. These two phrases are the essence of Chu Hsi's analysis of jen. See above, note
37. I-shu, 18.2a.
38. Yü-lei, 95.9a; this is a continuation of the passage in which he also elaborated Ch'eng Hao's paralysis image (see above, note 31).
39. CTTC, 74.19a.
40. Chan, "The Evolution of the Neo-Confucian Concept of Jen, " p. 316.
41. The courtesy name of Hsieh Liang-tso (1059-1103) was Hsien-tao, and his honorific name was Shang-ts'ai. He was one of the most distinguished pupils of the Ch'eng brothers.
42. HLTC, 35.76, annotation to text of "Treatise."
43. See Yü-lei, 6.166.
44. See Yü-lei, 6.17a.
45. CTTC, 32.20a-b, Letter to Chang Chin-fu.
46. It is possible that in scanning T'oegye's correspondence some relevant passages may have been missed, but those I have found are as follows: The longest passage (37.116-136) discusses Analects 6:23, which relates jen and wisdom to mountains and water respectively. Two passages (21.22a-b; 35.366-37a) discuss the substance-function relationship of jen and wisdom mentioned by Chu Hsi in his commentary on the Diagram of the Supreme Ultimate." Another passage explains sayings of Ch'eng I that link jen to the pulse and to the sight of a baby chick (21.13ab). There are two passing references to jen in terms directly connected with the "Treatise" and "Diagram" (25.36a; 37.26a). One letter explicates a passage in which Ch'eng I discusses commiseration in terms of life or vitality and briefly reaffirms the relationship of consciousness with knowing and wisdom (24.66-7a); another discusses jen and commiseration in the course of considering the transcendent unity of principle and the mind's similar transcending of the distinction of interior and exterior (19.37b38a).
47. See Chu sŏ chŏryŏ (The Essentials of Chu Hsi's Letters), 3.21a-22a; 28b29a; 396-41a (selections from letters to Chang Chin-fu [Chang Shih), and 9.llb12a (Letter to Wu HuI-shu).
48. TGCS, A, 24.7a, p. 579, Letter to Chŏng Chajung.
49. See above, note 29.