chinese metaphysics

8/19/2019 Chinese Metaphysics

1/35

SEP logo

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

Browse

About

Support SEP

Search SEP

Entry Contents

Bibliography

Academic Tools

Friends PDF Preview

Author and Citation nfo

Bac! to Top

"etaphysics in Chinese Philosophy

First published Thu Apr #$ #%&'

(hile there was no word corresponding precisely to the term )metaphysics*$ China

has a long tradition of philosophical in+uiry concerned with the ultimate nature of

reality,its being$ origins$ components$ ways of changing$ and so on- n this sense$

we can spea! of )metaphysics* in Chinese Philosophy$ even if the particular

+uestions and positions that arose di.ered from those dominant in Europe- E/plicit

metaphysical discussions appeared in China with a turn toward +uestions of

cosmogony in the mid0fourth century BCE- These cosmogonies e/press a number of

views that became fundamental for almost all later metaphysics in China- n these

te/ts$ all things are interconnected and constantly changing- They arise

spontaneously from an ultimate source 1most often called dao道

$ the way2 thatresists ob3ecti4cation but is immanent in the world and accessible to cultivated

people- 5itality and growth is the very nature of e/istence$ and nature e/hibits

consistent patterns that can be observed and followed$ in particular patterns of

cycles and interaction between polar forces 1such as yin 陰 and yang 陽2-


2/35

This basic outloo! di.ers fundamentally from the assumptions that dominated

metaphysical thin!ing in Europe after the introduction of Christianity6 the belief that

the ultimate principle of the world is transcendent but anthropomorphic 1as human

beings are made in its image2$ that the things of the world arise through design$ and

that the world is composed of ontologically distinct substances- These assumptions

have been widely re3ected by philosophers over the course of the #%th century$which is partly what ma!es metaphysics in Chinese Philosophy interesting- n the

Chinese tradition we see one possibility for what metaphysics might loo! li!e if we

were neither apologi7ing for nor reacting against such views 1in 8iets7che9s terms$ a

metaphysics based neither on :od nor the Death of :od2- This is not to say that

Chinese metaphysics is homogenous or without its own problems- ;ather$ we can

say that while European metaphysics has tended to center on problems of

reconciliation 1how ontologically distinct things can interact2$ Chinese metaphysics

has been more concerned with problems of distinction- The most central problems

are around the status of individuali7ed things$ the relationship between the patterns

of nature and speci4cally human values$ and how to understand the ultimate

ground of the world in a way that avoids either rei4cation or nihilism- These become

problems precisely because of the underlying assumptions of holism and change-

;eaders should !eep in mind that a survey of metaphysics in Chinese Philosophy is

no more ade+uate than such a survey would be regarding Europe- have

necessarily left out more than have included- Aside from introducing the most

in


3/35

- Coherence and 5ital Energy in 8eo0Confucianism

- Conclusion6 Beyond )Chinese Philosophy*

Bibliography

Academic Tools

ther nternet ;esources

;elated Entries

&- s there )"etaphysics* in Chinese Philosophy=

This entire entry could be ta!en up with the +uestion begged by its title6 s there

metaphysics in Chinese Philosophy= The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy itself

seems ambivalent- There is this entry$ but instead of a corresponding entry for

)"etaphysics in European Philosophy* there is an entry for )"etaphysics* that

draws e/clusively on European traditions- ;ather than argue for the legitimacy ofmy topic in the abstract$ will e/plicate speci4c issues and positions from various

Chinese philosophers$ leaving it to readers to decide how well they 4t the category

of metaphysics- 8onetheless$ one cannot entirely ignore the problem of applying

the term )metaphysics* so far beyond its :ree! origins$ and so a few preliminary

comments are necessary- 1For discussions of this issue$ see i and Per!ins

forthcomingA (eber #%&? Tan #% iu #%&& (en #%&& Gu #%&& Gu and Hu

#%%I Jhao #%% >ansen #%%& Jhu &II Cheng &II%-2

f we designate an area of philosophical in+uiry concerned with the ultimate natureof reality,its being$ origins$ components$ ways of changing$ and so on,there is no

+uestion that Chinese philosophers addressed issues within this domain- The

+uestion is$ do we apply the label of )metaphysics* to philosophical arguments

within this domain$ or do we reserve the label for some speci4cally European

approach or theory- The latter faces an obvious problem,any de4nition broad

enough to include all European approaches will include some Chinese theories$ 3ust

as any de4nition narrow enough to e/clude all Chinese approaches will also e/clude

some European philosophers that everyone would agree addressed metaphysics-

The +uestion$ though$ is more about rhetoric and power than the facts- f

)metaphysics* labels the broader domain$ then studying metaphysics involvesengaging other cultures$ and an SEP entry on )"etaphysics* that discussed only

ideas derived from Europe would be biased and partial- n contrast$ if )metaphysics*

labels a speci4cally European view$ then courses$ boo!s$ and encyclopedia entries

on metaphysics legitimately e/clude other cultures-


4/35

At the same time$ while applying )metaphysics* to both European and Chinese

thought is more inclusive$ it also obscures the depth of the di.erences between the

two- "ore insidiously$ it erodes these di.erences by presenting Chinese philosophy

in European terms- That is a legitimate worry$ but given the almost entire e/clusion

of other cultures from the discipline of philosophy$ the greater danger is ignoring

Chinese Philosophy- Get if we do ta!e Chinese Philosophy as having metaphysics$ wemust strive to avoid distorting it to 4t into European terms- For e/ample$ a simple

approach would be to list the main topics in European metaphysics and then see

what Chinese philosophers have to say about them- The results would be

disappointing$ and this approach would miss what is most interesting about a cross0

cultural perspective$ which is its ability to show that we have not been as!ing the

most interesting or relevant +uestions- (ithin this entry$ then$ have tried as much

as possible to follow and e/plicate the main issues that arose when Chinese

philosophers were concerned with the nature of reality- have then made brief

gestures toward how these issues might connect to metaphysical problems in the

European tradition-

A label li!e )metaphysics* refers to certain human practices at the same time that it

draws boundaries around those practices- (hile Chinese philosophers engaged in

the !inds of practices that metaphysics refers to$ they did not draw the same

boundaries- solating metaphysical in+uiry from practices of self0cultivation$ for

e/ample$ would have struc! almost any Chinese philosopher as odd$ if not

dangerous- Thus there is no native Chinese term mar!ing the same boundaries as

)metaphysics* in European philosophy- (hen Chinese encountered the term$ it was

translated by way of Kapanese as /ing er shang /ue 形而上學$ literally$ )the study of

what is above forms*- )(hat is above forms* had long been a central concept in

Chinese philosophy$ originating in a passage from the )Hici* commentary on the Gi

King易經$ the Classic of Changes$ which says6 )(hat is above forms refers to the

way Ldao 道M what is below forms refers to utensils L+i 器M* 1:ao >eng &II6 @%2-

L&M The distinction between what is above forms and what is below forms has a

vague resemblance to the distinction between metaphysics and physics$ but the

di.erences are telling- First$ what is above forms cannot be fully separated from

what is below forms 1see (ang forthcoming2- Studying only what is above forms

would ma!e little sense- Second$ while the distinction between metaphysics and

physics can be construed in many ways$ its most common correlate in the European

tradition is the distinction between transcendence and immanence- n the Chinesetradition$ the issue instead is the relationship between the formed and the formless-

The implications of this di.erence will appear across a range of metaphysical issues-

#- Proto0"etaphysical Bac!ground6 The "andate of >eaven


5/35

As far as we !now$ e/plicit metaphysical discussions began in China in the mid to

late @th century BCE with the ao7i 1Daode3ing2 and associated te/ts- Before that$

the two dominant philosophical movements were the "ohists and the ;u

1Confucians2- Both focused on political and ethical issues and showed little direct

concern with metaphysical +uestions$ but one can 4nd metaphysical views implicit

in their positions- These are closest to the surface in their discussions of the divine$which set the conte/t for the emergence of metaphysical debates-

The two !ey concepts are tian天 1heaven2 and ming 命 1the command fate2- The

idea of tianming 天命

1the )"andate of >eaven*2 4rst came to prominence in

rationali7ing the con+uest of the Shang dynasty by Ning (en and Ning (u$ who

founded the Jhou dynasty in the eleventh century BCE- >eaven is described in

anthropomorphic terms as having awareness$ preferences$ and values- ts most

fundamental concern is for the people$ as e/pressed in a famous line from the

):reat Declaration* chapter of the Boo! of Documents 1Shangshu 尚書26 )>eavensees from where my people see heaven hears from where my people hear* 1+uoted

from "eng7i 'A'2- As a political doctrine$ the claim is that heaven will support rulers

who help the people and will bring disaster on rulers who do not- n this view$ the

world wor!s on regular principles that encompass ethical and political concerns-

>uman beings determine their own success or failure based on these patterns

rather than depending on divine whim- The emergence of this view is commonly

seen as a decisive moment in the formation of Chinese philosophy-

(hile heaven is presented as a willful and anthropomorphic being in the early partsof the Shangshu 尚書$ it was not transcendent in the sense of being e/ternal to the

system of nature- The term tian simultaneously refers to the s!y$ with senses of the

orderly movement of the heavens and of something that encompasses all things

e+ually- The classical Chinese word for the )world* or )realm* is literally what is

)under0heaven*$ tian/ia 天下- Since the actions of heaven occur through the world$

the two are often diOcult to distinguish- The primary e/pression of heaven9s will is

through human actions,to lose heaven9s mandate is to lose the support of the

people- The eventual transition in conceptions of heaven from a willful deity to the

causal patterns of nature was possible because heaven was never separate from

those patterns- Debates were about the nature of heaven rather than its e/istence$

and heaven remained a central term for philosophers holding widely di.erent

viewpoints-

The belief that heaven rewarded good people and punished those who were bad

came into +uestion as the Jhou dynasty fell apart- Something li!e the classical

problem of evil arose as centuries of civil war and disaster made it diOcult to


6/35

believe that the world was structured along ethical lines 1see Per!ins #%&@2- Three

responses can be distinguished- ne$ e/empli4ed by the "ohists$ defended and

theori7ed the earlier view that heaven rewarded those who are good$ de4ned as

those who care inclusively for other people- The second +uestioned the regularity of

any natural order$ emphasi7ing that good and bad events come without reason and

without concern for 3ustice- This view was associated with a new meaning for ming$ta!ing it not as a command but as something more li!e blind fate- The third position

argued for the regularity of natural patterns but too! those patterns as amoral- n

this view$ human beings remain in control of their fate$ but what brings success is

not necessarily being ethical$ at least in a conventional sense- 5ersions of this view

appears in the ao7i and in theories arising from practical arts li!e medicine or

military strategy- (hile e/pressed in di.erent ways in di.erent times$ the belief that

nature follows consistent patterns that can guide human action became a dominant

view across Chinese philosophies$ while the relationship between these patterns

and humanistic values became one of the main points of dispute-

?- The Cosmogonic Turn

Sometime probably in the middle of the fourth century BCE$ a radical shift in

vocabulary$ concerns$ and visions of the human too! place-L#M This new position has

long been !nown from the ao7i$ but recent archaeological studies show that the

ao7i was 3ust one of a number of positions that together constitute what we might

call )a cosmogonic turn*-L?M These te/ts are the 4rst we !now of to directly +uestion

how the diverse things of the world arise and ta!e form- This concern seems to have

been bound up with de0centering and de0privileging human beings- As the Jhuang7i

puts it6

n stating the number of things we say there are )ten thousand*$ and human beings

are 3ust one of them- LM n comparison with the ten0thousand things$ Lhuman

beingsM are not even li!e the tip of a hair to the body of a horse- 1:uo &I$ &6

'@ cf- Jiporyn #%%I6 I2

This brea! with anthropocentrism went along with a shift away from humanistic

values li!e rightness 1yi 義2 or ritual propriety 1li 禮2 and toward concerns with

maintaining life$ reducing desires$ and acting spontaneously-

These cosmogonies share the following four assumptions6


7/35

The diverse things of the world ultimately trace bac! to a single source-

The generation of things happens spontaneously$ without design$ purpose$ or

deliberate values-

The ultimate is immanent in the world and can be accessed in some way-

Between the ultimate and the myriad concrete things$ there are intermediary steps$

particularly a role for polarities and cyclical patterns-

Almost every e/ample of cosmogonic thin!ing in Chinese philosophy shares these

characteristics$ so it is important to discuss them in some detail-

?-& "onism

All Chinese thin!ers who discussed ultimate origins too! that origin to be uni+ue-

The best !nown name for this source is dao 道$ which means path$ way$ or guide-Another important name is tai3i 太極$ the )supreme polarity*-L@M The term tai3i

appears in the Gi King as the original unity from which yin and yang emerge- t

remained an important term and become particularly prominent during the

Confucian revival in the Song dynasty- Positing a single source had a decisive

in


8/35

The terms you 有 and wu 無 are among the most important metaphysical terms in

the Chinese tradition- They are often translated as )being* and )non0being*$ but wu

refers not to radical nothingness but to the lac! of di.erentiated beings- Thus in the

conte/t of the ao7i$ >ans0:eorg "oeller 1#%%2 translates the two terms as

)presence* and )non0presence*$ ;oger T- Ames and David - >all 1#%%?2 translate

them as )determinate* and )indeterminate*$ and Broo! Jiporyn 1#%&@2 as )being0there* and )not0being0there*- ne problem in ta!ing the ultimate as no0thing is that

it becomes impossible to spea! of- The danger of reifying it is unavoidable$ leading

into an alternation between those tending toward rei4cation and those re3ecting it-

For e/ample$ the Jhuang7i points out that as soon as you label something$ even as

no0being 1wu2$ it becomes a thing that needs its own e/planation6

There is being$ there is no0being$ there is not yet beginning to be no0being$ there is

not yet beginning to be not yet beginning to be no0being- 1:uo &I$ #6 I cf-

Jiporyn #%%I6 &'2

This very warning against rei4cation$ though$ is e/plicated into an inuainan7i$ which

ta!es each phrase as labeling an identi4able point in a progression of concrete

stages- This dialectic between being and no0being was later ta!en up in a di.erent

form through Buddhist debates about emptiness$ and it can be considered one of

the central metaphysical problems throughout the Chinese philosophical tradition

1See (ang Bo #%&&$ Cheng #%%I$ and the essays in iu and Berger #%&@2-

?-# Spontaneous :eneration

f we ta!e no0being as indeterminacy$ then the problem of a 4rst cause is not

getting many from one nor getting something from nothing but rather how

di.erentiation emerges from the undi.erentiated- The common e/planation appeals

to another !ey metaphysical concept,7iran 自然- The character 7i 自 is a re


9/35

identi4cation of being and conatus 1striving2 and even with 8iet7sche9s )will to

power*-

Two important points follow- First$ e/istence is seen not in terms of abstract being

but rather as sheng 生6 life$ growth$ birth$ vitality- The fundamental role of shengappears e/plicitly in the )Hici* commentary on the Gi King$ which says that the

foundation of the Changes is shengsheng$ )generating and generating*$ )growing

and growing*$ )living and living*$ or even )natura naturans* 1:ao >eng &II6 ?2-

This phrase inspired the famous description of nature as shengsheng bu/i 生生不息6

generating$ generating$ never ceasingR t is sometimes said that Chinese philosophy

lac!s ontology 1and thus metaphysics2 because philosophers were never concerned

with being as such- t is more accurate to say that Chinese philosophers too!

dynamic organi7ation as implicit in the very nature of being$ rather than positing an

e/ternal source for motion and order- This means that ontology is also cosmology$

even biology-

Second$ if spontaneous generation is the very nature of being$ then one can

legitimately attribute 7iran to the ultimate or to things themselves- So chapter #' of

the ao7i says$ )>uman beings follow earth$ earth follows heaven$ heaven follows

dao$ dao follows 7iran*$ but chapter @ spea!s of )the 7iran of the myriad things*$

and in chapter &$ the people spea! of their own 7iran- This contrasts the common

division between :od as self0caused and everything else as caused by :od$ a view

which ultimately sees being as divided into two fundamentally di.erent !inds- n

employing a univocal conception of being as sheng$ Chinese philosophies did notsegregate self0generation from the world itself-

?-? mmanence

The third common point is that the ultimate is immanent in the world- t is worth

noting that the lac! of tense in classical Chinese introduces a fundamental

ambiguity into all of these cosmogonies,while they can be read as describing

something that happened in the past$ they can 3ust as well describe an ongoing

process in which the generative function is always present- n one passage$

Jhuang7i is as!ed where dao is and he replies that there is no place from which dao

is absent 1wusuo bu7ai 無所不2- Pushed to give an e/ample$ he says dao is in ants

and cric!ets- (hen as!ed to go lower$ Jhuang7i says dao is in weeds$ bro!en tiles$

and even in piss and dung 1:uo &I$ ##6 '% cf- Jiporyn #%%I6 I2- Similar

statements would later be made about Buddha0nature$ particularly in the tradition

of Chan ! 1Jen2 Buddhism- The immanence of the source is demonstrated most of


10/35

all by the fact that it remains accessible to cultivated people- n the ao7i$ dao is

something one can use in the world6

Dao is constantly without name- Although in its unhewn simplicity it is minute$

heaven and earth do not dare subordinate it- f princes and !ings can preserve it$the ten thousand things will ma!e themselves their guests- 1Ch ?#2

t is diOcult to 4nd the right language to describe the relationship between dao and

human beings- The dao is not e/ternal$ so it is not a matter of getting or reaching it$

and it is not an ob3ect that could be grasped- Since the self0so spontaneity to which

dao refers is always present$ what is re+uired is a negative process of removing

obstacles- Jiran is what remains if we free ourselves from striving and conventional

goals- Thus this same process is described as wuwei 無"$ which literally means

)lac!ing action* but refers to giving up striving and e.ort- The Jhuang7i givesanother e/ample$ the )fasting of the heartmind* 1/in7hai #$2 that allows us to rely

directly on vital energy 1+i2 and respond spontaneously to whatever appears before

us 1:uo &I$ @6 &@ cf- Jiporyn #%%I6 #2-

?-@ Polarity and Cycles

All of the cosmogonies posit stages between the ultimate and the concrete myriad

things of the world- The need for intermediary stages is given no e/plicit

3usti4cation$ but it follows if things arise spontaneously rather than by consciouschoice or design- f their ground is immanent rather than teleological$ concrete

things must be e/plained through a gradual process of spontaneous di.erentiation-

>aving a series of stages also allows for degrees of di.erentiation within a

connected whole- That provides an e/planation not 3ust for the concrete myriad

things$ but also for nature as a system-

The most common stage involved interaction between two forces- These polar

forces could be speci4ed in many ways,heaven and earth$ hot and cold$ dry and

moist,but the pair that came to dominate is yin 陰

and yang陽- 1For anauthoritative study of yin and yang$ see (ang #%-2 Gang originally referred to the

south side of a mountain$ which received the sun$ while yin referred to the north

side- Qltimately$ yang was associated with the masculine$ the forceful$ and the

bright$ while yin was associated with the feminine$ the yielding$ and the obscure-

Creativity followed from the interaction of yin and yang$ modeled on se/ual

reproduction-


11/35

Another common point is a role for cycles and processes of return- ne prominent

model is the four seasons- The change of seasons places cycles of growth and

decay into a broader conte/t of continuous vitality- The change of seasons itself$

though$ was seen as e/pressing a more fundamental cycle between poles such asyin and yang- Cyclical change could also be theori7ed through the progressions of

generation 1sheng 生2 or overcoming 1!e %2 among the 4ve phases 1wu/ing &'26

wood$ earth$ 4re$ air$ and metal- Another version of this cycling between poles was

the claim that when processes reach an e/treme$ they reverse- Get another

manifestation is that things emerge from a common source and ultimately return to

that source- n all of these cases$ cyclicality e/plains the sustainability and

predictability of natural patterns-

@- mpartiality and Di.erentiation8o pre0Buddhist Chinese philosophers claimed that the +ualitatively di.erentiated

world we e/perience is an illusion$ but their monistic metaphysics privileged

connectedness and unity- (hile patterns of di.erentiation may be ob3ective$

individuation 1i-e-$ what counts as a thing2 is provisional and conte/tual- t is always

possible to view all things as forming one whole or one body$ and this unity has

strong tendencies toward e+uali7ing values- From our conte/tual point of view$ one

thing can be said to be better$ bigger$ or more beautiful than another$ but from a

broader perspective all things have the same status- This could lead toward

s!epticism of absolute values 1as in the Jhuang7i2 or toward an imperative to care

for all things- >ui Shi 1c- ?%?%' BCE2 is reported to have said6 )Care over


12/35

A person of King lost a bow and was not willing to search for it$ saying$ )A person of

King lost it$ a person of King will 4nd it$ so why search=* Nong7i heard this and said$

)f you leave out VKing9$ then it is acceptable*- ao Dan heard it and said$ )f you

leave out Vperson9$ then it is acceptable*- Thus it was ao Dan who reached the

utmost impartiality- 1Chen Wiyou &I@$ &@6 @'2L'M

The level of impartiality attributed to ao7i ma!es loss impossible- Everything is

already found-

As the reference to Nong7i suggests$ this tendency toward inclusivity threatened the

humanistic ethics of the Confucians- (hile they continued to focus on social and

ethical issues$ they needed a metaphysical basis for their views- "oreover$ while

the cosmogonies e/empli4ed by the ao7i e/plained the dynamism inherent in

particular things and they e/plained the broader patterns of nature in which thosethings operated$ they did not address the di.erences between !inds of things,what

ma!es human beings di.er consistently from dogs= The concept that arose to 4ll

this gap and to 3ustify Confucian humanism is /ing - 1see Per!ins #%&?2- Hing is

most often translated as the )nature* of a thing or !ind of thing$ but it refers

speci4cally to the way a thing responds spontaneously to its environment- n human

beings$ /ing manifests itself primarily as desires and emotions$ broadly labeled as

+ing .

1genuine a.ects2- ne of the !ey +uestions debated by the Confucians was

the nature of these spontaneous responses,do they push us to pursue our own

pleasures or do they lead us to care for other people=

Hing became a foundation for theories of motivation but its roots are in

metaphysics- Hing derives from heaven and is closely connected to sheng 生$ the

term meaning to live or generate- Hing moves from the generic creativity or vitality

of nature to the speci4c life processes of !inds of things- "ore concretely$ /ing was

conceptuali7ed as the dynamic


13/35

The term +i$ translated here as )vital energy*$ is already well !nown in English- t

was originally ta!en as one !ind of stu.$ connected with air and breath$ but it

eventually became the dominant label for the basic stu. of the world$ used to

e/plain all !inds of dynamic processes$ from the formation of heaven and earth tothe patterns of weather to the processes of the human heart-LM t was closely

connected with life and the generative power of nature- n this passage$ human

a.ects 1including desires and a tendency to approve or disapprove2 are the

movement of this +i when stimulated by events in the world- This is part of the

Confucian response to the focus on wuwei and reducing desires in te/ts li!e the

ao7i and Jhuang7i,a.ects li!e sorrow and care arise spontaneously$ by 7iran-

They are as natural for human beings as it is for water to


14/35

'- Correlative Cosmology

8ear the end of the (arring States Period$ new assumptions about cosmology

appeared that dominated the >an dynasty and profoundly inow could they !now from where they truly

comeR 1Chen Wiyou &I@$ #%@6 &?I2

The categories used could be more or less general$ so on one side might be )human

being* or )animal* while on the most general side all things could be classi4ed as

either yin or yang- Another of the most common categories were wood$ earth$ 4re$

air$ and metal$ !nown as the 4ve phases 1wu/ing2- Get another set were based onthe Gi King$ using either the eight trigrams or si/ty0four he/agrams- These various

systems of categori7ation were eventually integrated$ so that categories from one

could be translated into the others- :iven the underlying ontology of change and

process$ categori7ation is not based on inherent +ualities or essences- The basis is

not the thing itself but its typical ways of acting and reacting,does it tend to

e/pand or contract$ wor! gradually or swiftly$ manifest itself obviously or subtly=

Since these traits are relational$ the same )thing* may not always be in the same

category 1it might act li!e wood in one conte/t but metal in another2$ and because

they are dynamic$ the categories give immediate information on how things can be

controlled$ in


15/35

Consider the use of the most general categories$ yin and yang- Gang labels the

tendency to e/pand and dominate yin labels the tendency to draw things in by

yielding- n the broadest level$ anything can be put in one of these two categories$

but yin and yang are not inherent properties- The same thing that might be active

and dominating in one relationship might be softer and yielding in another 1as is

commonly the case in Chinese medicine2- The function of the labels can becompared to the way we label cause and e.ect- (e can designate a cause and an

e.ect in any change$ but being a cause is not an essential property- Everything is

simultaneously the cause of many e.ects and the e.ect of many causes- As cause

and e.ect illustrate$ even a set of two labels can be helpful in analy7ing situations$

and yinyang could become more and more speci4c in various ways- For e/ample$ in

the Gi King$ lines representing either yin 1a divided line2 or yang 1a straight line2 can

be combined into groups of three to form eight trigrams$ or groups of si/ to form @

categories- Each of these lines could be ta!en as more or less stable$ thus leading to

@%I possible readings-

The conception of causality at wor! here has come to be labeled with the Chinese

phrase ganying 23$ )stimulus and response*- n fact$ causality was described in

several ways- ne model is resonance$ as in the +uotation above where the

vibrations of one string stimulate vibrations in strings tuned to the same note-

Another model is stimulation$ in which one action induces or provo!es the actions of

another- Causality could also be a matter of drawing something forward- These

ways of analy7ing causality re


16/35

The signi4cance of these correlations is that phenomena can be in


17/35

8ature e/hibits the same hierarchical relationships implicit in the systems of

categori7ation- Gin and yang were still seen as complementary$ but they shifted

from e+ual forces driving generation to mar!ers for une+ual positions in a system of

correlated arrangements 1(ang #%%'2- So the dominance of the ruler correlated

with the dominance of the father but also with the dominance of the sun and

ultimately the dominance of yang- Another e/ample of this shift was the correlationof leniency and violence 1or the civil$ wen 7$ and the martial$ wu 82 with the spring

and the fall- This correlation made the use of violence a necessary and natural

principle$ while also restricting it to certain times- This cosmology ends up doing

much of the wor! that was done by anthropomorphism in the European tradition- n

both cases$ human culture is seen as mirroring structures at the foundation of the

natural world- n the case of Europe$ that foundation is seen as human0li!e in that

we are made in the image of :od$ thus anthropomorphi7ing the natural- n Chinese

correlative cosmology$ the opposite occurs$ where speci4cally human phenomena

are theori7ed as natural- n both cases$ social and political hierarchies are given a

metaphysical basis-

The >an dynasty collapsed in ##% CE$ leading to a long period of fragmentation$

instability$ and uncertainty- The dominant philosophical movement is !nown as

Huan/ue9學$ )Profound earning*- The term /uan means dar!$ obscure$ or

profound$ but it also has a sense of what precedes any division$ as it is used in the

4rst chapter of the ao7i- The best !nown wor!s from this movement are the

commentaries by (ang Bi 1###@I2 1on the ao7i and Gi King2 and by :uo Hiang 1=

? CE2 1on the Jhuang7i2- 1For studies of Huan/ue philosophy$ see Jiporyn #%&@6

&?&@ Jiporyn #%%? (agner #%%? Chan &III-2 Because of the centrality of the

ao7i and Jhuang7i$ the movement is sometimes !nown in English as )8eo0

Daoism*- Di.erent philosophers held di.erent positions$ but the core metaphysical

issue was how to understand dao as ultimate ground$ particularly how to interpret

descriptions of dao as no0being 1wu 無2 and how to understand the relations

between dao and the concrete world we e/perience-

Huan/ue was important for establishing much of the metaphysical vocabulary used

in later Chinese philosophy- ne of the most important terms is li :$ which in its

original use was a verb for laying out borders according to the contours of the land$

or for carving 3ade according to its own patterns- Both (ang Bi and :uo Hiang use li

as a technical term,for (ang Bi li refers to the patterns of coherence represented

by the he/agrams of the Gi King$ while for :uo Hiang li refers to patterns of

di.erentiation that spontaneously arise in the world 1Jiporyn #%&@6 &?@2- i was

later used by Chinese Buddhists to refer to emptiness and by 8eo0Confucians to

refer to patterns of coherence- The latter will be discussed further below-


18/35

A second !ey concept to arise is the pairing of ti ( and yong ;- 1For discussions of

ti0yong$ see Jiporyn #%&@6 &@I&'' Jhang #%%#6 #'#'? Cua #%%# Cheng #%%#-2

Gong means use or function- Ti originally refers to an organi7ed form$ a pattern that

can be recogni7ed$ or to a body or part of the body- The pairing of tiyong wasapplied in di.erent ways$ but what is most consistent through these uses is that ti is

singular and yong is multiple- For e/ample$ the same piece of wood 1ti2 could have

many di.erent uses 1yong26 to fuel a 4re$ to build a house$ to carve into bowls$ and

so on- As in this e/ample$ the multiplicity of yong comes through involvement in

concrete circumstances or purposes- n this way$ ti is usually less determinate than

yong- n fact$ the ultimate ti was generally ta!en as fully indeterminate$ thus

allowing for in4nite determinate uses 1yong2- The contrast between ti and yong

sometimes loo!s li!e a contrast between the thing itself and the various ways it can

be used- Such a contrast is highlighted in the translation of ti as substance- This

translation is misleading in several ways- First$ li!e yin and yang$ the labels ti and

yong are conte/tual and thus the very same thing might be considered as ti in oneconte/t but as yong in another- Second$ the ultimate ti is almost never ta!en to be

individuated,it is emptiness or vital energy or the patterns of coherence 1li2 that all

things share- So the )substance* of a thing ultimately undermines its status as an

individual- t is worth noting that the phrase chosen to translate the ontos in

ontology was benti


19/35

the the main themes in Buddhist metaphysics,impermanence 1anityawuchang 無

=2 and dependent co0arising 1pratXtyasamutpYdayuan+i >?2-

The process oriented metaphysics of Buddhism 4t well with the Chinese

philosophical tradition$ but it had a profound transformative e.ect- Buddhistmetaphysics brought a level of precision and comple/ity honed through a long

tradition of intense disputation and dialectic- Positions that had been ta!en for

granted in China were articulated in detail and defended against alternatives that

had never been a concern 1such as the idea of an eternal and unchanging soul2-

8ew possibilities were introduced$ including the claim that only mind is real- f

course$ as Buddhism impacted Chinese philosophy$ China transformed Buddhism$

leading to schools of Buddhism that never e/isted in ndia-

"uch of Buddhist metaphysics involves negotiating a middle ground betweenrei4cation and nihilism- The problem appears in relation to the self,it may be true

that there is no self$ but surely there is something which grounds or generates or is

the illusion of self- ne early school 1Abhidharma2 argued the self is a label for what

is really an aggregate of elements and factors$ !nown as dharmas 1fa @2- Apparent

wholes li!e the self can be reduced to these constituent factors$ 3ust as a chariot

can be reduced to its parts- A more radical view$ though$ e/tended the criti+ue of

the self to any entity that might be ta!en as independently real or self0de4ned$ in

Buddhist terms$ anything that might have svabhYva$ literally )self0being* or )self0

nature* 1in Chinese$ 7i/ing 自-2- This denial of self0being follows from dependent

co0arising$ which claims that any event depends on and is bound up with others-ac!ing an independent essence or ground$ all phenomena are said to be empty$

Z[nyatY or !ong A- Emptiness is meant to be a middle ground between aOrming or

denying the e/istence of things$ but such a middle ground is diOcult to articulate$

and the history of Buddhism can be seen as a dialect between those proposing

some !ind of reality 1tending toward rei4cation2 and those re3ecting it 1tending

toward nihilism2-

This dialectic is portrayed di.erently by di.erent thin!ers$ depending on what they

ta!e to be the 4nal position that encompasses all others- As an e/ample$ we canconsider the progression given by Jongmi BC 1%@&2$ a philosopher

representative of the >uayan DE

school but with close lin!s to Chan 1see :regory

&II' and #%%#2- n his n+uiry into the rigins of >umanity 1Guanren lun FGH2

Jongmi begins with the view that each person has a soul that is reincarnated

according to his or her actions- >e criti+ues this position by analy7ing this self in

terms of its parts,the self cannot be identi4ed with the totality of parts 1since some

parts are lost at death2 nor with one part among many 1which would ma!e the other


20/35

parts irrelevant and thus not really even parts2- This leads into the ne/t position$

that

bodily form and cognitive mind$ because of the force of causes and conditions$ arise

and perish from moment to moment$ continuing in a series without cease$ li!e thetric!ling of water or the e calls this 4fth and 4nal position )The Teaching that ;eveals the 8ature*$

reinterpreting a term we have already seen$ /ing -$ which here stands for the

Buddha0nature 1Fo /ing L-2- This ultimate reality could also be referred to as the


21/35

true mind or as the TathYgatagarbha 1;ulai7angMNO2$ which literally means the

)(omb of the Thus0Come* 1)Thus0Come* being a common name for the Buddha2-

(hile the last three positions had prominent advocates in China$ the 4nal position

became dominant and was shared by Tiantai 天P$ >uayan$ and Chan Buddhists-1For broader studies of metaphysics in >uayan Buddhism$ see Jiporyn #%%% din

&I# Coo! &I- For Tiantai$ see Jiporyn #%%@$ #%%% Swanson &II-2 ne obvious

+uestion is how this 4nal position di.ers from the position of "ind0nly- Jongmi9s

argument comes down to the relationship between reality and illusion$ which is

another core metaphysical problem within Chinese Buddhism 1see Nantor

forthcoming2- The basis of the problem is in the criti+ue of self0being- The world we

e/perience obviously 4ts the Buddhist account,nothing is independent$ a true

unity$ or free from change- Thus any metaphysics that allows for substances with

self0being re+uires a bifurcation between reality and appearances$ or more

speci4cally$ between the substance itself and the various +ualities or modes bywhich it appears- A common line of argument in Buddhist metaphysics is to attac!

any such split- To claim that things are empty is to say that there is nothing more to

them than there appears to be- This is the meaning of the common saying6 )form is

emptiness and emptiness is form*- Any attempt to articulate something as

ultimately real tends to fall into a split between reality and the changing

phenomenal world$ ma!ing the latter false or illusory- That is the core of Jongmi9s

criti+ue of the "ind0nly school- Buddha0nature as it is articulated in Tiantai and

>uayan attempts to tal! about ultimate reality while avoiding the dualism that

implies- This leads to the claim that all sentient beings are already enlightened,

what is needed is not to change reality or get rid of illusion but 3ust to reali7e that

we are already where we need to be-

ne of the more thorough and in


22/35

is not the same as designating water$ yet these designations do not )obstruct* each

other- The very same reality can be ta!en as the phenomena of everyday

e/perience and as emptiness-

The fourth perspective brings us to a metaphysical issue that has recurred acrossthe Chinese philosophical tradition,the interconnection of things- t is not 3ust that

emptiness and phenomena are mutually penetrating but that any phenomenon is

penetrated by all others- The claim that any one thing includes all others is clearest

on the level of causality and intelligibility- Consider the cause for your reading this

article- t might be for help in a course$ or because you followed a lin! out of

curiosity$ or from a desire to better understand the conte/t of the ao7i- But we

could say the cause was the story of how your parents met,had that not happened

you would not be reading this article- r it might be the story of how my parents

met$ or the creation of the internet$ or the founding of Stanford Qniversity- t could

be the gravitational pull of the earth or the farm that raised the food ate forbrea!fast- f everything is interconnected$ then anything could be given as a cause

for your reading this article- (hat ma!es one answer better than another is

determined only by the interests of the +uestioner 1are they interested in increasing

web traOc to the SEP= understanding digital humanities= the legacy of Stanford

Qniversity=2- This shows how any one event implicates and arises with all others-

Consider further$ though$ that all things are empty- They have no independent self0

nature$ so what it is to be that thing is e/plained entirely by all of the factors that

allow it to appear as what it is- Thus it is not 3ust that things implicate each other

but that things include each other- This inclusion applies not 3ust between any two

events but also between any event and the totality of other events the story of the

whole universe can be e/plicated from any one point- Broo! Jiporyn 1#%%%2 calls

this )omnicentric holism*,any phenomena can be ta!en as the center from which

the whole follows 1a position with remar!able similarities to that of eibni72- (e

must remember the soteriological purposes of these Buddhist theories,if any one

thing implies all others$ then it is impossible to grasp only one thing- :rasping and

attachment become incoherent- t is worth comparing this result with the

elimination of loss through radical impartiality$ discussed in Section @ above-

- Coherence and 5ital Energy in 8eo0Confucianism

The interpenetration of emptiness and phenomena is an aOrmation of the changing

world in which we live- Thus it is false to see Chinese Buddhism as life0negating or

as denying the diversity of the world- 8onetheless$ the metaphysics of emptiness is

directed toward overcoming attachments- Diversity remains$ but there are no

individuals that could be held onto- The Confucian response$ which became a

dominant force in the Song dynasty 1I%I2$ was driven primarily by an


23/35

aversion to these conse+uences- This reaction can be seen in three concrete

positions,the acceptance of su.ering and death as unavoidable$ the di.erentiation

of roles and norms within society$ and most of all$ the embrace of negative a.ects

such as sorrow at the death of a parent or an/ious concern for a child in danger$

ta!ing these as essential to our humanity- This Confucian movement was !nown as

the )earning of the (ay* 1Dao/ue 道學2$ but it has come to be !nown in English as)8eo0Confucianism*-

(hile based on practical concerns$ this Confucian revival was grounded in

metaphysical claims-LM n terms of the dialectal movement we have seen$ the 8eo0

Confucians ta!e all of the Buddhist positions as nihilistic- The 4rst in


24/35

Z$ humaneness or benevolence- To be humane is to support and e/tend the

generative process of nature itself- Furthermore$ there is a unity to things in the

world$ grounded in the fact that they are all made up of +i and they unfold in

interloc!ing patterns of ineaven is my father and earth is my mother$ and even such a small creature as

4nds an intimate place in their midst- Therefore that which 4lls the universe regard

as my body Lti (M and that which directs the universe consider as my nature L/ing

-M- All people are my brothers and sisters$ and all things are my companions- 1trans

from Chan &II6 @I2

Cheng >ao[\ 1&%?#&%'2 later compares one who does not care for these other

things to someone who has lost sensation in their own limbs- (ang Gangming 5陽]

1&@#&'#I2 e/tends these feelings of concern even to trampled grass and bro!en

roof tiles-

Deriving inclusive care from the vitality and unity of nature appeared in the (arring

States Period$ but in opposition to Confucianism- For the Confucians$ this focus on

being as vitality needed a counterpoint$ and that came through a reinterpretation of

the term li :- The diOculty of the term appears in the range of common

translations6 principle$ patterns$ coherence- i often refers to something we should

follow and in this sense it might be ta!en as principles$ but li also refers to actualpatterns of di.erentiation$ not 3ust to ideals- Considering that li is conte/tual and

involves human purposes and perspectives$ translating the term as )coherence* or

)coherent patterns* probably best brings these various aspects together- Stephen C-

Angle gives an e/cellent brief de4nition of li as )the valuable$ intelligible way that

things 4t together* 1Angle #%%I6 ?#2-LIM There are patterns of coherence in world$

and these patterns de4ne individual things$ constitute nature as a system$ and

structure human society- i describes the way that these patterns can be optimally

harmoni7ed or made to cohere so as to foster the human good 1i-e-$ to be valuable

and intelligible2-

n some ways$ the 8eo0Confucian interpretation of li is a return to earlier Chinese

views that too! nature as having stable patterns that we can recogni7e and follow-

The 8eo0Confucians defend these earlier views against what they saw as Buddhist

attac!s by claiming that the di.erentiated structure of the world we live in is real- At

the same time$ these patterns of coherence give speci4c form to our concerns and


25/35

e.orts$ so that one can 3ustify caring primarily for one9s own parents while still

ta!ing all things as part of one9s own body- Even so$ the term li had already been

appropriated by Buddhists$ and the 8eo0Confucian conception of li retains several

Buddhist aspects-

The most obvious e/ample is the claim that the totality of li is contained in any one

thing- Cheng Gi [^

1&%??&&%2 coined what became a standard motto6 )i is one

but distinguished as many* 1li yi fen shu :一_`2 1Angle #%%I6 @@2- This unity

within diversity was illustrated with a metaphor ta!en from Buddhism,the moon

reuayan above- The 8eo0Confucians do not go so far as to say that each thing

contains all other things$ though- Any instance of coherence implicates all others$

but events still have their own reality- Another common 8eo0Confucian claim withBuddhist overtones follows6 if the totality of li is included within any particular thing$

then it must also e/ist within each person9s heartmind- ne of the main disputes

among the 8eo0Confucians was on the precise meaning and signi4cance of this

point- Jhu Hiab 1&&?%%%2 argued that li is the nature 1/ing2 found in the heart$

while u Hiangshan cde 1&&?I&&I#2 and (ang Gangming too! li and the heart to

be identical- This leads to a di.erence in emphasis between the two main schools of

8eo0Confucianism regarding their recommended process of accessing li6 the )School

of i* 1li/ue :學2 1also !nown as the Cheng0Jhu school2 placed more emphasis on

study and learning$ while the )School of >eart"ind* 1/in/ue #學2 1the u0(ang

school2 concentrated more on self0re


26/35

cultivation must be conceptuali7ed not as a process of changing ourselves but

rather as removing the obstacles that !eep us from being what we already are-

Phillip K- vanhoe has nicely captured this point by contrasting the views of self0

cultivation for "eng7i and (ang Gangming as the di.erence between a model of

development and a model of discovery 1vanhoe #%%#2-

(ithin this shared position$ though$ there are great di.erences- (hile Buddhists

claim one who reali7es li 1emptiness2 will be free of desires and negative a.ects$

8eo0Confucians thin! someone who follows li will have the appropriate desires and

a.ects- Another ma3or di.erence from Buddhism is in how the obstacles to

enlightenment are conceptuali7ed- 8eo0Confucians always discuss li in relation to +i$

vital energy- f li refers to patterns of coherence$ +i is the stu. in which those

patterns inhere- This distinction has functional similarities with Aristotle9s distinction

between form and matter$ but the force of activity and change is with +i rather than

li- That means that li cannot be e/ternally imposed and must be immanent in +i insome sense- The precise ontological status of li and +i became one of the main

metaphysical disputes among Confucian philosophers- ne could easily claim that

the distinction between patterns of coherence and the stu. that follows the patterns

is more conceptual than ontological- That is close to the view seen in Jhang Jai$ for

whom +i is active and inherently patterned- For Jhu Hi and (ang Gangming$ though$

li has ontological priority over +i- Jhu Hi writes6

Fundamentally$ li and vital energy cannot be spo!en of as prior or posterior- But if

we must trace their origin$ we are obliged to say that li is prior- >owever$ li is not aseparate entity- t e/ists right in vital energy- (ithout vital energy$ li would have

nothing to adhere to- 1modi4ed from Chan &II6 ?@2

The +uestion of the relationship between +i and li e/tended into cosmogonies as

well- (hile Jhang Jai too! +i to be the ultimate$ Jhu Hi claimed it was li 1using the

term Supreme Polarity2- Since li is the locus of intelligibility and values$ the +uestion

ultimately was whether causal and e/planatory priority was with this coherence or if

coherence was instead a product of the generative forces of nature 1+i2-

The distinction between li and +i provided a way to deal with the tension between

the claim that the nature of human beings is good and the recognition that people

need e/tensive self0cultivation in order to actually be good- i is inherently good and

is the same in all things$ but the +uality of +i varies- Turbid +i,which manifests

itself as sel4shness and partiality,obscures li- Thus from the perspective of li


27/35

human nature is good$ but from the perspective of li and +i together$ a person can

be good$ bad$ or in between- n the psychological level$ the wor! of self0cultivation

is cultivating tran+uility and impartiality on the metaphysical level$ one puri4es +i

so as to more perfectly e/press li-

- Conclusion6 Beyond )Chinese Philosophy*

f one turns to metaphysics in the twentieth century and beyond$ it becomes

necessary to distinguish )Philosophy in China* from )Chinese Philosophy*- i!e

almost everywhere else in the world$ the twentieth century in China was

characteri7ed by the incorporation of ideas from other cultures$ most obviously from

Europe- The terms )philosophy* and )metaphysics* were introduced as distinct

concepts through translation and thus they become the ob3ects of conscious

re


28/35

Brindley$ Erica Fo/$ #%$ "usic$ Cosmology$ and the Politics of >armony in Early

China$ Albany6 SQ8G-

Billioud$ S\bastien$ #%$ Thin!ing Through Confucian "odernity6 A Study of "ou

Jongsan9s "etaphysics$ eiden6 Brill-

Chan$ Alan Nam0eung$ &III$ Two 5isions of the (ay6 A Study of the (ang Pi andthe >o0Shang Nung Commentaries on the ao0T7u$ Albany6 SQ8G-

Chan$ (ing0tsit$ &I@$ )The Evolution of the 8eo0Confucian i as Principle*$ Tsing

>ua Kournal of Chinese Studies$ @1#26 ?&@-

1ed-2$ &II$ A Source Boo! in Chinese Philosophy$ Princeton6 Princeton

Qniversity Press-

Chen Derong$ #%&&$ "etaphorical "etaphysics in Chinese Philosophy6 llustrated

with Feng Goulan9s 8ew "etaphysics$ 8ew Gor!6 e/ington Boo!s-

Chen Wiyou mno$ &I@$ Ushi Chun+iu Hinshi )*+,pq$ Shanghai6 Shanghai

:u3i Chubanshe-

Cheng$ Chung0ying$ &II%$ )Chinese "etaphysics as 8on0"etaphysics6 Confucian

and Daoist nsights into the 8ature of ;eality*$ in Qnderstanding the Chinese "ind$

;obert E- Allinson 1ed-2$ /ford6 /ford Qniversity Press$ pp- &#%-

$ #%%#$ )n the "etaphysical Signi4cance of ti 1Body0Embodiment2 in Chinese

Philosophy6 Benti 1riginal Substance2 and ti0yong 1Substance and Function2*$

Kournal of Chinese Philosophy$ #I1#26 &@'&-

$ #%%I$ )i 禮

LsicM and +i 0

in the Gi3ing r易經s6 A ;econsideration of Being and8onbeing in Chinese Philosophy*$ Kournal of Chinese Philosophy$ ?1s&26 ?&%%-

Cheng$ Chung0ying and 8icholas Bunnin 1eds2$ #%%#$ Contemporary Chinese

Philosophy$ /ford6 Blac!well-

Coo!$ Francis >-$ &I$ >ua0yen Buddhism6 The Kewel 8et of ndra$ Qniversity Par!6

Pennsylvania State Qniversity-

Csi!s7entmihalyi$ "ar!$ #%%@$ "aterial 5irtue6 Ethics and the Body in Early China$

eiden6 Brill-

Cua$ Antonio S-$ #%%#$ )n the Ethical Signi4cance of the Ti0Gong Distinction*$

Kournal of Chinese Philosophy$ #I1#26 &?&%-

Edelglass$ (illiam$ and Kay :ar4eld 1eds2$ #%%I$ Buddhist Philosophy,Essential

;eadings$ /ford6 /ford Qniversity Press-

Fo/$ Alan 1trans-2$ #%%I$ )Dushun9s >uayan Fa3ie :uan "en 1"editative Approaches

to the >uayan DharmadhYtu2*$ in Edelglass and :ar4eld #%%I6 ?#-


29/35

:ao >eng tu$ &II$ Jhouyi dachuan 3in7hu v易wxyz$ Kinan6 Wilu Shushe-

:raham$ Angus C-$ &I$ Gin0Gang and the 8ature of Correlative Thin!ing$

Singapore6 nstitute of East Asian Philosophies-

$ &II$ Disputers of the Tao$ aSalle$ 6 pen Court Press-

$ &II# L&I'M$ Two Chinese Philosophers6 The "etaphysics of the Brothers

Ch9eng$ aSalle$ 6 pen Court-

:regory$ Peter 8-$ &II'$ n+uiry nto the rigin of >umanity6 An Annotated

Translation of Tsung0"i]s Guan Ken un with a "odern Commentary$ >onolulu6

Qniversity of >awai9i Press-

$ #%%#$ Tsung0mi and the Sini4cation of Buddhism$ >onolulu6 Qniversity of >awai9i

Press-

$ #%%I$ )Jongmi9s Guanren lun 1n+uiry into the rigin of the >uman Condition26 The >ermeneutics of Doctrinal Classi4cation*$ in Edelglass and :ar4eld #%%I6 &?

&@-

:uo Wingfan {|}$ &I$ Jhuang7i 3ishi ~•€q$ Bei3ing6 Jhonghua Shu3u-

>ansen$ Chad$ #%%&$ )"etaphysical and "oral Transcendence in Chinese Thought*$

in Two ;oads to (isdom=6 Chinese and Analytic Philosophical Traditions$ Bo "ou

1ed-2$ aSalle$ 6 pen Court$ pp- &I##-

>enderson$ Kohn B-$ &I@$ The Development and Decline of Chinese Cosmology$

8ew Gor!6 Columbia Qniversity Press-

vanhoe$ Philip K-$ #%%#$ Ethics in the Confucian Tradition6 The Thought of "eng7i

and (ang Gangming$ ndianapolis6 >ac!ett 1#nd edition2-

$ #%&%$ );eview of Peter N- Bol$ 8eo0Confucianism in >istory*$ Dao6 A Kournal of

Comparative Philosophy$ I6 @&@'-

Nantor$ >ans0;udolf$ forthcoming$ )Concepts of ;eality in Chinese "ahYyYna

Buddhism*$ in i and Per!ins forthcomingA-

Naso.$ ra E-$ &I@$ The Thought of Chang Tsai$ Cambridge6 Cambridge Qniversity

Press-Nnobloc!$ Kohn$ and Ke.rey ;eigel 1trans-2$ #%%%$ The Annals of U Buwei6 A

Complete Translation and Study$ Stanford6 Stanford Qniversity Press-

ai$ Naryn -$ #%%$ An ntroduction to Chinese Philosophy$ Cambridge6 Cambridge

Qniversity Press-

i$ Chenyang$ #%&?$ The Confucian Philosophy of >armony$ 8ew Gor!6 ;outledge-


30/35

i$ Chenyang and Fran!lin Per!ins 1eds2$ forthcomingA$ Chinese "etaphysics and ts

Problems$ Cambridge6 Cambridge Qniversity Press-

$ forthcomingB$ )Chinese "etaphysics and ts Problems6 An ntroduction*$ in i

and Per!ins forthcomingA-

iu$ Keeoo$ #%&&$ );econstructing Chinese "etaphysics*$ Kournal of East0(est Thought$ &1&26 &'&?-

$ forthcoming$ )n Defense of Chinese Wi08aturalism*$ in i and Per!ins

forthcomingA-

iu$ Keeoo and Douglas Berger 1eds2$ #%&@$ 8othingness in Asian Philosophy$ 8ew

Gor!6 ;outledge-

iu Jhao ‚$ #%%?$ :uodian Chu3ian Kiaoshi{ƒ„…†q$ Fu7hou6 Fu3ian ;enmin

Chubanshe-

"a3or$ Kohn S-$ &II?$ >eaven and Earth in Early >an Thought6 Chapters Three$ Four$

and Five of the >uainan7i$ Albany6 SQ8G-

"a!eham$ Kohn$ &II@$ 8ame and Actuality in Early Chinese Thought$ Albany6 SQ8G-

$ 1ed-2$ #%&%$ Dao Companion to 8eo0Confucianism$ Berlin6 Springer-

1ed-2$ #%$ earning to Emulate the (ise6 The :enesis of Chinese Philosophy as

an Academic Discipline in Twentieth0Century China$ >ong Nong6 Chinese Qniversity

Press-

1ed-2$ #%&@$ Transforming Consciousness6 Gogacara Thought in "odern China$/ford6 /ford Qniversity Press-

"ichael$ Thomas$ #%%'$ The Pristine Dao6 "etaphysics in Early Daoist Discourse$

Albany6 SQ8G-

"oeller$ >ans0:eorg$ #%%$ Dao De King$ aSalle$ 6 pen Court-

din$ Steve$ &I#$ Process "etaphysics and >ua0Gen Buddhism6 A Critical Study of

Cumulative Penetration 5s- nterpenetration$ Albany6 SQ8G Press-

Per!ins$ Fran!lin$ #%&?$ )The Spontaneous :eneration of the >uman in the >eng

Hian*$ Dao6 A Kournal of Comparative Philosophy$ #26 ##'#@%-

$ #%&@$ >eaven and Earth are not >umane6 The Problem of Evil in Classical

Chinese Philosophy$ Bloomington6 ndiana Qniversity Press-

$ forthcoming$ )(hat is a Thing 1wu 物2=6 The Problem of ndividuation in Early

Chinese "etaphysics*$ in i and Per!ins forthcomingA-


31/35

Peterson$ (illard K-$ &I$ )Another oo! at i*$ Bulletin of Song and GUan Studies$

&6 &??&-

Sellman$ Kames$ #%%#$ Timing and rulership in "aster u]s Spring and Autumn

annals 1Ushi chun+iu2$ Albany6 SQ8G-

Swanson$ Paul$ &II$ Foundations of T]ien0T]ai Philosophy6 The Flowering of the Two Truths Theory in Chinese Buddhism$ Ber!eley6 Asian >umanities Press-

Tan$ Sor0hoon$ #%$ )i 1;itual;ite2 and tian 1>eaven8ature2 in the Hun7i6 Does

Confucian li 8eed "etaphysics=* Sophia$ '&1#26 &'''-

(agner$ ;udolf :-$ #%%?$ anguage$ ntology$ and Political Philosophy in China6

(ang Bi9s Scholarly E/ploration of the Dar! 1Huan/ue2$ Albany6 SQ8G-

(ang Bo$ #%&&$ )The Discovery and Establishment of wu6 Daoist "etaphysics and

Political Philosophy*$ translated by Trenton (ilson$ Contemporary Chinese Thought$

@?1&26 I#I-

(ang$ ;obin ;-$ #%%'$ )Dong Jhongshu9s Transformation of GinGang Theory and

Contesting of :ender dentity*$ Philosophy East ^ (est$ ''1#26 #%I#?&-

$ #%$ Ginyang6 The (ay of >eaven and Earth in Chinese Thought and Culture

18ew Approaches to Asian >istory2$ Cambridge6 Cambridge Qniversity Press-

$ forthcoming$ )Ginyang 8arrative of ;eality6 Chinese "etaphysical Thin!ing*$ in

i and Per!ins forthcomingA-

(eber$ ;alph$ #%&?$ )(hy Tal! about Chinese "etaphysics=* Frontiers of Philosophy

in China$ 1&26 II&&I-

(en >aiming$ #%&&$ );econstructing Chinese "etaphysics*$ Contemporary Chinese

Thought$ @?1&26 ?-

Hiong Shili$ forthcoming$ 8ew Treatise on the Qni+ueness of Consciousness$

translated by Kohn "a!eham$ 8ew >aven6 Gale Qniversity Press-

Gang :uorong$ #%%$ )Being and 5alue6 From the Perspective of Chinese0(estern

Comparative Philosophy*$ Philosophy East and (est$ '1#26 ##-

$ #%&&$ )An utline of a Concrete "etaphysics*$ translated by Chad Austin"eyers$ Contemporary Chinese Thought$ @?1&26 @?'I-

Gu$ Kiyuan$ #%&&$ )s Chinese Cosmology "etaphysics=,A :ree!0Chinese

Comparative Study*$ Kournal of East0(est Thought$ &1&26 &?'%-

Gu$ (eidong and Kin Hu$ #%%I$ )"orality and 8ature6 The Essential Di.erence

between the Dao of Chinese Philosophy and the "etaphysics in (estern

Philosophy*$ Frontiers of Philosophy in China$ @1?26 ?%-


32/35

Jhang Dainian$ #%%#$ Ney Concepts in Chinese Philosophy$ translated by Edmund

;yden$ 8ew >aven6 Gale Qniversity Press-

Jhao Dunhua$ #%%$ )"etaphysics in China and in the (est6 Common rigin and

ater Divergence*$ Frontiers of Philosophy in China$ &1&26 ##?#-

Jhu Bo!un$ &II$ )Daoist Patterns of Thought and the Tradition of Chinese"etaphysics*$ Contemporary Chinese Thought$ #I1?26 &?&-

Jinda$ Gvonne Schul7$ #%$ Kin Guelin]s ntology6 Perspectives on the Problem of

nduction$ eiden6 Brill-

Jiporyn$ Broo!$ #%%%$ Evil andoras the :ood6 mnicentrism$ ntersub3ectivity$ and

5alue Parado/ in Tiantai Buddhist Thought$ Cambridge 1"A26 >arvard Qniversity Asia

Center$ #%%%-

$ #%%?$ The Penumbra Qnbound6 The 8eo0Taoist Philosophy of :uo Hiang$ Albany6

SQ8G-

$ #%%@$ Being and Ambiguity6 Philosophical E/periments with Tiantai Buddhism$

aSalle$ 6 pen Court-

$ 1trans-2$ #%%I$ Jhuang7i6 The Essential (ritings$ with Selections from Traditional

Commentaries$ ndianapolis6 >ac!ett Publishing-

$ #%&?$ ronies of neness and Di.erence6 Coherence in Early Chinese Thought6

Prolegomena to the Study of i$ Albany6 SQ8G-

$ #%&@$ Beyond neness and Di.erence6 i and Coherence in Chinese Buddhist

Thought and ts Antecedents$ Albany6 SQ8G-

$ forthcoming$ )>armony as Substance6 Jhang Jai]s "etaphysics of Polar

;elations*$ in i and Per!ins forthcomingA-

Academic Tools

sep man icon >ow to cite this entry-

sep man icon Preview the PDF version of this entry at the Friends of the SEP

Society-

inpho icon oo! up this entry topic at the ndiana Philosophy ntology Pro3ect1nPh2-

phil papers icon Enhanced bibliography for this entry at PhilPapers$ with lin!s to

its database-

ther nternet ;esources


33/35

Bibliography of readings on Chinese philosophy 1maintained by Bryan 5an 8orden2

Bibliographies compiled by Paul ;- :oldin LSeveral bibliographies are included under

the );esources* tab$ including a nearly complete bibliography of materials on Early

China written in (estern languages-M

Chad >ansen]s Chinese philosophy pages

China0related lin!s 1Stephen C- Angle2

Chinese philosophy lin!s 1Chris Fraser2

Chinese Te/t Pro3ect 1Donald Sturgeon2 Lncludes a wide range of classical te/ts$

especially from pre0Win and >an dynasty sources- Te/ts are searchable$ lin!ed to

dictionary entries$ and include English translations when available-M

(esleyan Chinese Philosophical Ete/t Archive$ LAnother e/cellent source for

electronic versions of the Chinese te/ts-M;elated Entries

Chinese Philosophy6 epistemology _ comparative philosophy6 Chinese and (estern _

Confucianism _ Daoism _ ethics6 Chinese _ ao7i _ "adhyama!a _ "encius _

metaphysics _ 8eo0Confucianism _ 8eo0Daoism _ (ang Gangming _ Jhang Jai _

Jhuang7i _ Jhu Hi

Ac!nowledgments

This entry bene4tted greatly from detailed feedbac! given by Stephen C- Angle$

Broo! Jiporyn$ Naryn ai and Sor0hoon Tan$ as well as from discussions with

Chenyang i-

Copyright ` #%&' by

Fran!lin Per!ins fper!insdepaul-edu

pen access to the SEP is made possible by a world0wide funding initiative-

Please ;ead >ow Gou Can >elp Neep the Encyclopedia Free

Browse


34/35

Table of Contents

(hat]s 8ew

;andom Entry

Chronological

Archives

About

Editorial nformation

About the SEP

Editorial Board

>ow to Cite the SEP

Special Characters

Advanced Tools

Contact

Support SEP

Support the SEP

PDFs for SEP Friends

"a!e a Donation

SEPA for ibraries

"irror Sites

5iew this site from another server6


35/35

QSA 1"ain Site2

CS$ Stanford Qniversity

Stanford Center for the Study of anguage and nformation

The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy is copyright ` #%&@ by The "etaphysics

;esearch ab$ Center for the Study of anguage and nformation 1CS2$ Stanford

Qniversity

ibrary of Congress Catalog Data6 SS8 &%I'0'%'@