sedimentation in chinese aesthetics and epistemology: a buddhist expansion of confucian philosophy

sandra a. wawrytko

SEDIMENTATION IN CHINESE AESTHETICSAND EPISTEMOLOGY:

A BUDDHIST EXPANSION OF CONFUCIANPHILOSOPHY

Abstract

Li Zehou’s theory of sedimentation seeks to explain the uniquenessof the human species through its use of tools, both physical andcognitive, leading to cultures grounded in aesthetic taste and theprospect of suprabiological beings. However, the very sedimentationthat constructs human culture can stagnate into obstructingsediment. Buddhist philosophy offers an epistemology of desedi-mentation that avoids attachment to cultural sediment withoutsummarily rejecting its potential usefulness. More specifically,Buddhist “wisdom embracing all species” allows us to recognize ourinterconnection (pratıtya-samutpada) with nature by transcendinganthropocentrism, and opening more effective strategies for dealingwith ecological challenges.

I. Introduction

Thomé H. Fang (Fang Dongmei 方東美) (1899–1977) has declaredthat “Chinese are artists before they become thinkers.”1 WhileAmero-Eurocentric philosophers, wary of the link between the artsand the devalued phenomenal realm, have sought to transcendnature,2 Chinese philosophers have embraced artistic contributions tohuman experience of nature, Moism (Mojia 墨家) being a glaringexception. As a resurgent Confucian philosophy enters the globalarena, Li Zehou 李泽厚 has championed “the highly intuitive andinclusive Chinese aesthetics” that he sees as a replacement for reli-gion in “establishing this highest realm of human existence.”3 I willargue that these Chinese cultural resources can be enhanced byincorporating Buddhist philosophy’s intertwining of epistemologyand aesthetics. Buddhism’s “wisdom embracing all species” avoids the

SANDRA A. WAWRYTKO, Professor, Department of Philosophy, San Diego StateUniversity. Specialties: Buddhist and Daoist epistemology, comparative philosophy.E-mail: [email protected]

bs_bs_banner

Journal of Chinese Philosophy 40:3–4 (September–December 2013) 473–492© 2014 Journal of Chinese Philosophy

Confucian tendency toward anthropocentrism, thus allowing for anexpansive approach to pressing contemporary issues.

The role of the contemplative artist/artistic thinker has been exam-ined carefully in Li’s work, merging traditional Chinese thought withKantian and Marxist theories. Li analyzes Marx’s theory of the excep-tional status of the human species in terms of “sedimentation” (jidian積淀), “the accumulations and deposits of the social, rational, andhistorical in the individual through the process of humanizingnature,” which renders humans “relatively independent of the mate-rial world.”4 This “noumenal construction,” the creation of ideas, con-cepts, and values, delineates the human understanding of reality.5

Thus, the cultural sedimentation inherited from the Zhou Dynastyand revitalized by Kong Zi孔子 (551–479 bce) served as the founda-tion of early Confucian philosophy. Kant contributes the noumenalquest of consciousness, referred to by Li as a priori subjectivity.Our dual nature as both intuitively sensuous and rationally supra-sensuous beings allows us to become “suprabiological animals,”capable of transcending the constraints of natural instinct.6 Theassumption that humans possess unique moral and aesthetic aspira-tions resonates with Confucian social and political philosophy. Lifurther incorporates Marxist materialism by identifying the makingand use of tools as the crucial factor in human evolution. Viewingwords as tools, we can interpret Wittgenstein’s “language-game” as aform of cultural sedimentation.7

While Li’s optimism concerning the “onward and upward” trajec-tory of the human species is both admirable and inspirational, itassumes that humans will inevitably “improve” on nature. In particu-lar he argues for the centrality of “the aesthetics of science andtechnology” in the next phase of human evolution.8 However ananthropocentric perspective cannot address the complex challengeswe currently face in areas such as environmental sustainability. Phi-losophies such as Daoism and Buddhism that question the assump-tion of human superiority have been undervalued, their potentialcontributions to productive discourse dismissed or unrecognized.Nonetheless, certain themes in Li’s writings bode well for a productivemerging of Confucian and Buddhist approaches. A common groundexists in Li’s adherence to “pragmatic rationality” and a “one-worldview” that rejects a phenomenal/noumenal divide. Most importantly,Buddhist philosophy is uniquely equipped to confront suffering,which Li finds largely absent from traditional Chinese art. Ratherthan wallowing in the suffering (duh· kha) inherent in the human con-dition, Buddhism offers constructive methods to address the mind’scontribution to the perception of life as suffering, thereby alleviatingunnecessary suffering.

SANDRA A. WAWRYTKO474

To foster the possibility of philosophical synthesis, a Buddhistenrichment of sedimentation’s salutary role in evolution will beoffered, with an emphasis on Chan. Kong Zi himself was aware thatthe li裡 could be reduced to mere pretense. Accordingly, sedimenta-tion that results in sediment or counterproductive mire must bedeconstructed, while a trans-human realization of Buddha-naturemust be recognized beyond the confines of human self-cultivation.Beneath the competing priorities of sedimented Confucian culture(wen文) and the pre-sedimented Daoist Uncarved Block (pu樸), theMiddle Path (madhyama-pratipad) (zhong dao 中道) of Buddhismnondualistically sees through limiting views (dr·s·t·i), including the viewof no view.

For Channists even their own philosophical doctrines were barriersto awakening. A dynamic epistemological process can be traced fromthe sedimentation of “great faith” in the Dharma to “great doubt” thatregards it as sediment, opening the way to the “great death” of delu-sion. Central to the process is recognition of the very “self” to beawakened as epistemological sediment. Examples of desedimentationabound in the Chan literature, most especially its poetry, underscoringLi’s description of Chan as simultaneously “poetic philosophy” and“philosophical poetry.”9

The rise of a reconstructed Confucianism, bolstered by Marxistprinciples of construction, is a matter global significance. Whatmight be the consequences of applying a materialist philosophy ofsuprabiological beings whose central mission is the survival of thehuman species? Can a philosophy such as Li Zehou’s effectivelymatch the humanization of nature with the “naturalization ofhumans” (ren de ziranhua 人的自然化)? We have witnessed hownatural disasters are exacerbated by acts of human hubris—such aslocating urban centers on land below sea level prone to hurricanesand building nuclear power plants or mega dams in active earthquakezones. Anthropocentrism is a dysfunctional assumption that under-mines the survival of all species. To effectively engage with nature wemust expand our vision to appreciate “the wisdom embracing allspecies.”10

II. Li Zehou’s Reconstruction Project

In the Critique of Pure Reason Immanuel Kant attempts a self-styledCopernican revolution in philosophy, using the model of Newtonianscience to rehabilitate metaphysics by clarifying epistemology. Thisentails a reassessment of the interaction between our assumedsources of knowledge: matters of fact and the relation of ideas,

SEDIMENTATION IN CHINESE AESTHETICS AND EPISTEMOLOGY 475

phenomena and noumena, empiricism and rationalism. Kant’s goal,however, is to answer the question, “How are synthetic a priori judg-ments possible?” That is, how can we know that concepts we dependon, such as the principle of causality, are both rationally certain andempirically relevant?

Li poses more fundamental questions, not only about how humanknowledge is possible but how humankind is possible. While Kantregards human knowledge as the result of the interaction betweensensibility and understanding, presumably sharing a common source,Li concludes that both human knowledge and the human species arepossible due to our ability to make and use tools. His theory bridgesthe seeming gap between understanding and sense data, ideas andphysicality that troubled Kant. Expanding Kantian epistemology, Lihas coined the word subjectality (zhutixing 主體性), grounded in thephysical body (ti體), to reflect both the absence of a rigid mind-bodydualism in traditional Chinese culture and the materialism ofMarxism. By moving beyond Kant’s focus on the subjectivity(zhuguanxing 主觀性) of idea (guan 觀)-centered human conscious-ness, embodied subjectality functions as the missing link betweenphysical phenomena and abstract noumena.11 The body experiencesideas as well as sense data.

Tool use makes the emergence of humans as “suprabiological”beings possible as the sedimentation process—“the accumulation andcondensation of the social, rational, and historical to become some-thing individualistic, sensuous, and intuitive”—humanizes nature.12

Conceptual tools evolve from physical tools, leading to the aestheticproducts of advanced civilization. For Li, sedimentation is the sourceof Kant’s a priori intuitions such as causality, which function as “aninternal ‘humanized nature,’”13 an experiential, a posteriori speciesheritage shared across cultures. Cultural and individual sedimenta-tions also arise, based on particular experiences.14 Consciousness itselfis rooted in tool production and tool use.

Li Zehou’s goal is “going ‘back to classical Marxism’ . . . not just areturn to the old theory of productive forces, but also answering thecall to create a new theory of subjectivity—a theory concerned withdeveloping the ideas of a human ‘cultural-psychological formation’ or‘sedimentation.’”15 The focus shifts from “class struggle” to the “pro-ductive forces” of science and technology, in contrast with MaoZedong’s “practice” of “utopian idealism”—“voluntaristic actionstaken to ‘change the world.’”16

For Li, aesthetics is “the highest achievement of this ‘humanizationof nature.’”17 As symbols of “humanized nature,” works of art “arethe deepest expression of human ‘cultural-psychological formation’”or sedimentation. Aesthetic pleasure has a physiological basis, yet


transcends the sense organs; it allows for emotional as well as inten-tional cultivation and ethically elicits “pleasure experienced in loftyaspiration and moral integrity [that] helps man arise to a supra-moral,perceptual realm in human life.”18 Ultimately, the moral human beingis “the highest artistic creation . . . a work of art,” reflecting Kant’sclaim in the Critique of Judgment that humans are “the purpose of thewhole of nature.”19

III. Li’s Depiction of Buddhism

Li tends to treat Buddhism as a catalyst for rather than a majorcomponent of Chinese philosophy. In The Path of Beauty: A Study ofChinese Aesthetics, the historical unfolding of Buddhism in China isdepicted as a tool of oppression and suppression wielded by those inpower, mirroring Marxist denunciations of religion: “Religion, afterall, was only an anesthetic and ‘heaven’ merely a reflection of thehuman world.”20 Harsh condemnation of Buddhist stories from Indiahinges on the theme of human self-sacrifice undertaken on behalf ofother species, which Li interprets as means for the elite to promoteself-sacrifice in the oppressed population, “a perfect example ofcounter-rational religious fanaticism.”21 Such an interpretation dis-torts the underlying message of trans-species compassion, a logicalresult of the wisdom that recognizes the Buddhist principle of inter-dependence and interconnectedness (pratıtya-samutpada). Similarly,the Buddhist practice of meditation is dismissed by Li as “a greatordeal of suffering and duress.”22

In Li’s account Buddhism degenerated further into “a docile toolfor the protection of the feudal system.” Its artistic accomplishmentwas only noteworthy once it had become sinicized in form andthemes. Depictions of the Pure Land mirrored the Chinese court, yetoffered only “the allurement of a happy life in heaven . . . a bettertranquillizer,” “illusions of joy and happiness.” Chan Buddhism isportrayed as essentially a Chinese product, which discarded the offen-sive religious elements of previous schools. Although credited with aphilosophy, Chan is denounced as “a new and unique narcotic, anintegration of speculation and faith.”23 Only one Buddhist poem, byWang Wei, is included in the discussion of this peak poetic period.Later expressions of Chan are deemed escapist, echoing the Daoistretreat to nature.24

A more balanced analysis of Buddhism is advanced in Li’s TheChinese Aesthetic Tradition. Nonetheless, a circumscribed view ofBuddhist philosophy as intent on the “pursuit of metaphysical tran-scendence” belies Buddhist nondualism.While Arthur F.Wright ranks


“the transformation of Chinese culture by Buddhism” among “thegreat themes in the history of Eastern Asia,”25 Li depicts Buddhism aslaunching “an unprecedented assault on traditional philosophies.”26

Even the aesthetic influences of sinicized Chan, he contends, eventu-ally were “subordinated under the rubric of Confucianism andDaoism.”27

Li does acknowledge Confucianism’s common ground with bothDaoism and Buddhism: “After a process of arduous self-cultivation, aperson may identify with the cosmos and attain the aesthetic experi-ence of pleasure in one’s lofty aspiration and moral integrity. Thisexperience transcends the sensuous, as confirmed by the practice ofDaoist qigong and Buddhist practice of chan.”28 Other points ofagreement also exist, such as the “one-world view” Li identifies asconsummately Chinese, paralleling Buddhist nondualism in which“the profound realization of noumenal emptiness occurs by way ofthe ever-changing and transforming universe.”29 Hence, Buddhistsapply the arts as a form of upaya (skillful means) to escape theconfines of linguistic sedimentation.

Buddhist philosophers share some of the same epistemologicalconcerns as Kant and Li, including the primacy of consciousness andthe priority of engagement in the world.

Instead of rational control, Confucianism emphasizes the mutualpenetration and merging of sensuality and rationality, individualityand sociality, physiology and sociology, from consciousness to uncon-sciousness. It will not allow the dictatorship of the intellect oversensuality, nor allow the terrible exposure of blind, primitiveemotion. The harmony of the whole psyche of Confucianism is inopposition to the alienation of rationality and the alienation ofsensuality.30

Neo-Confucian critics admitted Buddhism’s rationality made it a for-midable rival. Cheng Hao 程顥 (1032–1085) declares the Buddha ismore dangerous than egoist Yang Zhu楊朱 (440–360 bce) or Univer-sal Love advocate Mozi墨子 (ca. 470–391 bce) because his teaching is“somewhat reasonable.” Echoing Li’s critiques, Cheng contends thatBuddhists possess “seriousness to straighten the internal life but norighteousness to square the external life. The Buddhists are funda-mentally afraid of life and death and are selfish. . . . They devotethemselves only to penetration on the transcendental level, not tolearning on the empirical level.”31 Cheng Hao’s brother, Cheng Yi程頤 (1033–1107) is even more alarmist, asserting that merely inves-tigating Buddhist doctrines will make one a convert, while insistingthat Buddhism offers no worthy new contributions: “We already havein our Way whatever is correct in them.”32


When Li laments Chinese philosophy’s failure to confront the factof suffering, he can have no better, more experienced ally than theBuddhist philosopher. Li rejects the traditional Chinese focus onharmony for ignoring the reality of conflict. He also spurns the Chris-tian model that glorifies suffering as the price of passage to paradise.Instead he wants to deal with “the real sensuous and spiritual pain andbitterness inherent in actual experience.”33 Confronting human suf-fering or the sense of dysfunctionality in life (duh· kha) was the origi-nal motivation for Siddhartha’s quest. It led him to become theBuddha, the one who has awakened to the fourfold truth of theexperience of duh· kha, its cause in tr·s·n· a, its elimination by eliminatingtr·s·n· a, and the eightfold path that provides guidelines for accomplish-ing this. Significantly, the Buddha’s analysis applies not only to humanbeings, but to all sentient beings.

IV. Desedimentation: Rationale and Methodology

Recognition of limits is ingrained in Chinese philosophical tradition,beginning with the Classic of Change (or the Yijing 《易經》) inwhich Hexagram 60 focused on Limitation or Restraint (Jie節). In theGreat Learning (or the Daxue《大學》) the third of the eight threadsinvolves a recognition of one’s emotional and intellectual limits.Kant expounds on the limits of reason in the first Critique, acknowl-edging that the noumena can be thought but not known (Preface).In Chapter 22, Laozi’s 老子 (sixth century bce) Dao De Jing《道德經》wisely warns us that exceeding limits results in reversionto the opposite:

Crookedness prefigures perfection;Bending prefigures straightness;Hollowness prefigures fullness;Wearing out prefigures renewal;Deficit prefigures gain;Plenitude prefigures perplexity.34

We might add “sedimentation prefigures desedimentation,” recogniz-ing the inherent limitations of sedimentation without needing tonullify it. Chung-ying Cheng astutely has noted sedimentationpresupposes sediment, silt blocking the dynamic flow of water.Recognizing the potential for sedimentation to become obstructive,Buddhist philosophy advises a timely use of deconstruction whenstagnation occurs.

In Buddhism the consciousness that Li credits with allowing forwhat he takes to be the unique use of tools by humans is a construct,sedimentation. Self-consciousness, consciousness of the self as a self,


of ourselves as distinct and separate members of the human species,engenders discriminating mind, what Laozi refers to as “cunning intel-lect” (zhi智). The cunning create new tools without anticipating theirdangerous and unintended applications. Henry Ford never dreamedhis signature invention would be a major factor in global warming.Nuclear power can power our cities, but can also engulf them in massdestruction. The inventers of cell phones never conceived that somany people would die due to the deadly distractions posed by theirinnovative devices.

The character for culture, wen文, depicting decorations made on apiece of wood, that is, human “improvements” on nature, is closelyassociated with the evolution of written language. The improvementprocess applied to human beings corresponds to Confucian self-cultivation, which presupposes that one is not born, but becomes, ahuman being in the fullest sense through education. Daxue commen-tary 3 compares “carving and burnishing” to learning and self-cultivation to “cutting and polishing.” Xunzi 荀子 adopts a moreaggressive posture, urging those in authority to forcefully straightenand steam the naturally warped wood of human nature to make itconform to artificial standards (wei 為) in Chapter 23, the Xunzi《荀子》. Whatever the chosen method, the projected end resultseems to be what Li regards as the “highest artistic creation,” themoral human being. Presumably Xunzi would heartily approve of Li’spronouncement that “The beauty of society displays itself in humanstruggles to conquer and control nature.”35

Although Buddhism is often characterized as the Middle Path(zhongdao 中道), Daoists and Confucians have lauded centrality intheir own ways. In Chapter 5 of the Daodejing, Laozi advises us to“hold on to the middle (zhong中),” as does the Doctrine of the Mean(or Zhong Yong 《中庸》). Zhuangzi 莊子 speaks of “following themiddle course between two paths” whereby the sage “harmonizeswith both right and wrong and rests in natural balance.”36 Li refers toDaoism’s “naturalization of humans” as a counterpart to Confucian-ism’s “humanization of nature.” When interpreted as a dualisticchoice, an innate rivalry is assumed to exist between Daoists andConfucians.37 The humanly enhanced wen constructed by sedimenta-tion seems to conflict with the Daoist’s reversion to pre-sedimentedpu 樸. Although generally translated as the Uncarved Block, etymo-logically the character for pu evolved from the image of an unprunedshrub. Both renderings share the sense of something pristine, prior tothe human embellishments of wen.

The Buddhist Middle Path recognizes two roads only provisionally,as the twofold truth that is neither one nor two, although perceived orconceived as such by discriminating mind. In Buddhism there is


no attachment to sedimentation, but also no attachment to thenonattachment of pre-sedimentation. Kenneth Inada describes theBuddhist Middle Path as much more than

striking a happy medium, a balance between self-torture and self-indulgence . . . not simply a refined balancing act. Its essence is theachievement of that insight which crushes all views (dr·s·t·i) that mightbecome obstacles to the normal flow of life, whether of the twoextremes or even of the middle itself . . . this is an extremely difficultpath to tread but it is the Buddhist way to fulfillment of compassionand wisdom now. It is a middle way which has “no path,” where thegoal is the fullest development of man, in which wisdom and com-passion ultimately become one and the same reality.38

Thus, when Li proclaims that the Buddhist “sees the world, things, andthe self as illusory,” it is more precise to say that the views of world,things, and self are illusory.39

The Sanskrit term dr·s·t·i has been defined as “seeing, viewing, views,ideas, opinions; especially seeing the seeming as if real, thereforeincorrect views, false opinions.”40 It is associated with darsana,“seeing[見], discerning, judgment, views, opinions; . . . thinking, reasoning,discriminating, selecting truth, including the whole process of deduc-ing conclusions from premises. It is commonly used in the sense ofwrong or heterodox views or theories.”41 Deluded views may be cul-turally conditioned or arrived at individually. Inexplicably Buddhismhas been misunderstood as engendering rather than diminishingdelusions.

Although Krishnamurti rejected all labels, his views resonate withthe epistemological priorities of Buddhist philosophy. He incisivelyanalyzed sedimentation as a barrier to truth: “Society’s function is tolimit the individual, to hold him within the boundary of respectability. . . the man who is seeking truth and acting, however worthy andnoble he may be, only creates further confusion and misery. He is likethe reformer who is merely concerned with decorating the prisonwalls.”42 It is not merely a theoretical concern for Krishnamurti, but amatter of critical importance:

if you understand this whole problem of how the mind is conditionedby society, if you allow truth to act and do not act according to whatyou think is truth, then you will find that such action brings about itsown culture, its own civilization, a new world that is not based onacquisitiveness, on sorrow, on strife, on belief. 43

Befitting “the wisdom that embraces all species,” Buddhism delvesbeneath human nature’s discriminating tendencies to access underly-ing Buddha-nature. Disruptive and deluded layers of sedimentationare peeled away to reveal reality as it is (suchness) (tathata or zhen ru眞如). Kong Zi recognized the potential for degeneration in ritual


practice (li禮), offering different evaluations of ritual practice (li裡)that deconstructed one and upheld another. Regarding compositionof a ritual cap, Kong Zi endorsed the more economical choice,although it violated traditional prescriptions. However, he firmly sup-ported the requisite bows, rejecting the popular practice to abandonthem as arrogant. In the Analects (the Lun Yu 《論語》), 9: 3, theinsistence on a certain fabric for the ritual cap is mindlesslyentrenched in physical superficialities; honoring the underlyingmeaning of the ritual requires an inner emotional state of humility,which cannot be reified. In a terse autobiographical statement,44 KongZi chronicles his evolution from a teenager intent on learning to aseptuagenarian whose intuitive morality no longer required the orderimposed by sedimentation. Like the Buddhists, Kong Zi questionedthe efficacy of linguistic sedimentation, citing the wordless model ofheaven.45

V. Chan: “Poetic Philosophy”/“Philosophical Poetry”

Like Kong Zi, Buddhist philosophers recognize that one’s under-standing evolves along with one’s own epistemological expansion. InChan, this process is described as the movement from “great faith” to“great doubt,” culminating in the “great death” of delusion. Faith insedimentation, such as the dharma, provides a comforting structure ofguidelines for initiates. However, the human mind fixates on concepts,devoid of deeper comprehension, necessitating a skeptical rethinkingof one’s views (dr·s·t·i). “Great doubt” frees us from the confines ofsedimentation that has become obstructive. The “great death” ofdelusion brings creative engagement with reality, as Wing-tsit Chanexplains: “The whole philosophy of the various methods [of Chan] isto broaden a person’s vision, sharpen his imagination, sensitize hismind so he can see and grasp truth instantly anytime and anywhere.”46

Similarly, Li believes truly great art can “break down habitual pat-terns of thinking and feeling (i.e., sedimentations) and free people toexperience the world anew.”47

However, Li also claims that the poetic philosophy of Chan “doesnot involve itself with actual, physical nature or human affairs, butonly with the construction of the psychological subject.”48 While someself-avowed Channists may fit Li’s depiction, it represents a flawedunderstanding of Buddhism as a philosophy. As to the first point, Lihimself credits Chan with an “inherent practicality” that accepts “theperceptual world,” “sensuous human existence,” and “everyday life inthe real world.”49 As for the self, Buddhism focuses on deconstructionrather than construction, especially the deconstruction of the self,


an-atman. Li’s description of “Chan sense” as “the mystical union ofself and Buddha, the forgetting of self and things, and the dissolutionof one’s spirit into the universe” disregards the fact that there is noself to be unified or forgotten, no spirit to be dissolved, and noBuddha as an other.50

Numerous examples of conceptual deconstruction appear in Chanliterature, demonstrating the continuum between the phenomenaland the noumenal. Even the designation of oneness is a product ofsedimentation, such that the Third Patriarch Sengcan 僧璨 advised,“Two comes from one,/Yet do not even keep the one.”51 Accordingly,Li’s claim that the “spiritual delight” of Chan “results from the height-ening of the senses and the profound sedimentation in them of ratio-nality” runs counter to many pronouncements by Chan practitionersregarding the need for desedimentation.52

Linji Yixuan 臨濟義玄 described how new students bait teachersby trotting out well-sedimented concepts. Linji understood “this isjust a device, you grab it and throw it into a deep hole.”53 To exposeit as silt the teacher may offer the contradictory responses Chan isso famous for, generating the doubt and confusion the student needsto see through conceptual pretense. If successful “the studentresponds, ‘This old baldy can’t tell good from bad himself,’ where-upon the teacher sighs with admiration, ‘Here is a true follower ofthe way!’”54 When Governor Wang inquired about the practices ofmonks at Linji’s temple, the master disavowed the use of sutras andmeditational techniques. Instead, he asserted, “They are all in train-ing to become Patriarchs and Buddhas.”55 Grasping Linji’s point,Wang succinctly noted how sedimentation can degenerate intomere sediment even among Channists: “Gold dust may be valuable,but in the eye it can cause blindness.”56 Li recognizes the dangers ofgold dust sediment in monastic training when he observes that“poems that are Chan in flavor are superior to those written byChan practitioners.”57

Some of most serious challenges to cultural sedimentation areadvanced by the disenfranchised, those who neither contribute to norbenefit from the constructs of civilization (wen). The Sixth PatriarchHui-neng 慧能, famously derided as an illiterate barbarian, wasamong the most effective practitioners of deconstruction, beginningwith the crucial poetry contest at his temple. The favored candidatefor succession, Yuquan Shenxiu 玉泉神秀 (606?–706), fell into sedi-mentation’s trap of cognitive literalism by rhapsodizing about thebody as the tree of awakening and the mind as a mirror. Hui-nengdeftly deconstructed this silt using “great doubt”—he denied awak-ening is a tree, noting that, because the mirror-mind has no literalstand, there is no place for dust to settle.


The eccentric Pang 龐 family deconstructed the sedimentation ofthe perfect Confucian family to reveal Buddhist egalitarianism.Having minds “without obstruction,” parents and children supportedone another as the dharma companions on the path to awakening.58

The layman status of the presumed family head, Pang Yun龐蘊 (740–808), also defied monastic stereotypes, evoking parallels to the laymanVimalakiriti.59 Asked “What was the first word Bodhidharma spokewhen he came from the West?” Layman Pang deconstructed arevered tradition by curtly exclaiming “Who remembers!”60 Yethaving been mired in the social constructs of sedimentation, thelayman had the greatest difficulty with his practice, comparing it totrying “to scatter ten measures of sesame seed all over a tree!” Hiswife declared her practice to be as easy as “touching your feet to theground when you get out of bed.” The Pang daughter described hernondualistic practice as neither difficult nor easy, enabling her todiscern the meaning of the Patriarchs on “the hundred grass-tips.”61

Wielding the weapon of desedimentation, female Channists chal-lenged sexist discrimination as antithetical to Buddhist philosophy.Governor Wang’s image of a valued social construct that is an impedi-ment is echoed by the twelfth-century nun Zheng-jue: “from the Westcame the wondrous meaning without words,/It may be gold dust, butdon’t let it get in your eyes!”62 A one-eyed nun asks, “Male or female:why should one need to distinguish false and true?”; in regard to abodhisattva, “Peeling away the bodhisattva’s skin would be of no usewhatsoever/Were someone to ask if it were the body of a woman orthat of a man.”63 Another speaks of having “kicked open heaven andearth” to be able to “rest my feet.”64 Once “the layered gates areshattered, any place is a place of tranquility” such that “Knocking onemptiness, extracting the marrow, becomes a way of life.”65 The Chanapproach to sedimentation that is stagnated sediment may be sum-marized by the words of Korean Son Master T’aego Bou 太古普愚(1301–1382), who offers “the true imperative whole: in the universe ofGreat Peace, cutting down stubborn stupidity.”66

Challenges to authoritarian control and superficial hierarchiesare consistent with the core insights of the historical Buddha. Thenondiscriminating mind of the awakened sees through the sociallysanctioned sedimentation that categorizes and constrains behaviorand expectations. However, this only becomes possible when wequestion our sense of identity, the construct of self, atman. Manycontemporary philosophers have difficulty questioning the existenceof the self as an ontological reality, having been conditioned andpredisposed to assume they possess a unique and independentself-identity, now upgraded from simplistic atman to sophisticatedDasein.67


Psychologists and evolutionary biologists have undertakenextensive research into the topic of the “symbolic self,” tracing theconstruction or sedimentation of the self as “an evolutionary adapta-tion.”68 In line with Li’s proposals, the symbolic self is yet anothercognitive tool that contributes to the survival of the species. It servesas a prime mover in the subsequent sedimentation process by gener-ating key components of culture and civilization, such as religion(seeking to understand the death of the self) and philosophy (seekingself-understanding).69 The sediment of the deluded personal identity(atman) generates egoism. The sediment of deluded group ego gen-erates racism and sexism. The negative consequences of both sets offalse views (dr·s·t·i) generally have been acknowledged. It is much moredifficult for us to recognize as obstructing sediment our deludedspecies identity, anthropocentrism, which generates speciesism. Con-vinced that our sense of human superiority is both obvious andnatural, few have dared to call it into question.

VI. A Confucian/Buddhist Synthesis beyondAnthropocentrism

At times Li seems to support Buddhism’s sweeping wisdom embrac-ing all species and at other times thwarts it. Discussing Chinese land-scape painting, Li states “it is significant that humans are depictedneither as masters of nature nor as its subjects,” noting that Chan-inspired landscape painting “communicates the unity of human expe-rience with nature, the unity of the humanization of nature and thenaturalization of humans.”70 Li correctly describes the Buddhist asseeking “an ultimate truth that transcends society and time, mortalityand change.”71 Disavowing the possibility of dominating or control-ling nature, he proposes a new way to conceive of “the unificationof heaven and human beings.” Moreover, Li’s view of artisticgenius mirrors Buddhist desedimentation as “‘a methodless method,’unteachable, unlimited by any fixed rule . . . inexpressible in words.”72

Nonetheless, Li cites the “survival imperative” that makes “theabsolute, supreme duty of any individual” maintaining the survival ofthe human species, which mandates anthropocentrism.73 Not contentto live in the shadow of overarching nature, minute figures dwarfed bytowering mountains and mist-filled valleys, our science and technol-ogy have driven us to the ambitious overreaching of a Dr. Franken-stein, such that our own creations threaten both human survival andthe integrity of nature. The technological prowess of humans that Liso proudly proclaims has led to the stultifying sedimentation of addic-tion to fossil fuels that we are just beginning to deconstruct through a


turn to renewable energy sources.74 Concerns have been raised aboutthe unforeseen ways in which cell phones, iPads, and social media arerewiring our brains. More is not necessarily better.

Buddhism offers a middle way between a neo-Luddite rejection oftechnology and an uncritical embrace of any seeming advance.We canavoid the dependency that is the antithesis of Chan self-power as wellas delusions of absolute control. The basis for and bias in favor ofhuman exceptionalism is undermined by evidence that humans arenot the only species that use tools.75 Supporting the Buddhist vision ofa wisdom embracing all species, even the much-touted symbolic selfmay not be the sole prerogative of humans.76

The unrestrained proliferation of technology as today’s dominantform of “humanization of nature” is not the sole option, nor does itguarantee progress. The techno-savvy innovator Steve Jobs is an illu-minating case study. He focused his extraordinary career on thedeconstruction of market sediment, heralded in a famous 1984 SuperBowl ad that introduced the Apple Macintosh. Against the backdropof George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four dystopia, a female runnersymbolizing Apple hurled a hammer at a screen broadcasting thetotalitarian message of “Big Brother.” Twenty years after its debut,Theodore Roszak offered an insightful retrospect:

Nothing did more to ruin the high hopes represented by Apple’shammer-tossing woman than the dominance of Microsoft, soon tobecome the most ruthless monopoly since Standard Oil. The resulthas been inferior technology cleverly contrived to keep the publicbuying one mediocre and buggy program after another. . . . The PCwas considered a people’s technology, a guerrilla technology, one ofthe last gasps of countercultural rebellion. . . . Apple’s idealism wasmarvelous, but how sadly misplaced. . . . We have watched high techbecome the next wave in big-bucks global industrialism, the propertyof the crass and the cunning, who are no more interested in empow-ering the people than General Motors was. The computer hasbrought us convenience and amusement, but, like all technology, it’sa mixed blessing. Far from smashing Big Brother, computers havegiven him more control over our lives. They have been a blessing forsnoops, con artists and market manipulators.77

Although Jobs was intent on and successful at questioning thetraditional business model of his rival IBM, what he accomplished wasonly a paradigm shift. He then became attached to his paradigm,resulting in his own sedimentation process grounded in brand loyalty;Jobs became the high-tech guru who is to be both idolized and obeyedas the final arbiter.78 From the perspective of Buddhism his rebelliondid not go far enough. Jobs advised, “Don’t be trapped by dogma—which is living with the results of other people’s thinking. Don’t letthe noise of others’ opinions drown out your own inner voice.”79


However, despite Jobs’s exposure to Zen Buddhism (through a Japa-nese master in America), he failed to question his own opinions, hisown dr·s·t·i. His “great doubt” never arrived at the “great death” ofdelusion.

While doubt is comparatively easy to instill, the addictive allure ofsedimentation always beckons. As we evolve from “great faith” to“great doubt,” we must persevere until we realize the “great death”of our own delusions. The human species seems to be at a transi-tional moment with sweeping global consequences. The contentiouseither/or inherent in a dualistic worldview pits humans against theintimidating forces of nature. Echoing the “onward and upward”trajectory of Kant’s Enlightenment, Mao Zedong declared, “For thepurpose of attaining freedom in the world of nature, man must usenatural science to understand, conquer and change nature and thusattain freedom from nature.”80 The human conquest of nature becamea prominent theme in what Kai-yu Hsu dubs “New Folk Songs” ofrevolutionary China:

A pole, three inches long,Carries dirt when we build a dike or dig a pond.Even a high mountain it can carry off;Even a huge river it can bend.81

Such human hubris, a prideful arrogance fueled by overweening con-fidence, eventually leads to a tragic fall. The engine of modernization/westernization has spawned ecological degradation that cannot beignored. Rather than looking for a simple technological fix, we mustdelve into the complex depths of the underlying philosophy respon-sible for the devastation. Responding to rampant air pollution, aPeople’s Daily editorial observed: “Only by forming a new cleaningand green spatial pattern, industrial structure, production process andliving style, can we possess a harmonious and beautiful earth. Theresponsibility of protecting our clean air lies not only in the govern-ment, but also in every business and every member of society.”82

The cultural resources to address such crises are rooted in Chinesehistory. Chinese medicine emphasizes the need to rebalance the qi(yin and yang energies) within an individual’s body to restore health.The character zhi 治—to cure, heal, or govern—includes the watercomponent, suggesting the cleansing, hence curative, action of flowingwater in removing sediment. Yu the Great (Da Yu 大禹), legendaryfounder of the Xia 夏 Dynasty, marshaled the power of waterwhen severe flooding plagued inhabitants around the Yellow River,“healing” the problem by having channels dug to allow the waters toreturn to their natural course (rather than imposing artificial barriers,such as dams). A similar healing strategy is found in the innovative


damn project designed by Li Bing 李冰 at Dujiangyan 都江堰. Tofacilitate natural flow, he recommended that they “dredge the sanddeeper,” while to avoid stagnation he advised them to “build the damlower,”83 words still inscribed on the walls of a temple dedicated to LiBing.

Primal Confucian philosophy embraces a healing process for thestate in the seventh of the eight threads listed in the Daxue. In eco-nomic philosophy, principle is prioritized over profit because “TheState profits not from profits, but from what is right.”84 A fifteenth-century Korean Buddhist monk, Kim Sisup (1435–1493), cites theDaxue in his essay “On Producing Wealth,” emphasizing the “truism”we are only now beginning to take seriously: “there is a limit to thewealth and goods that the world can produce; therefore one mustnever waste.” Kim cites counterproductive and tragic cases of anthro-pocentric arrogance: “burning forests to hunt birds and drainingponds to catch fish.”85 Kim then invokes the Confucian virtues ofhumanity and righteousness as the means for ensuring mutually sup-portive roots and branches.86

Paraphrasing Shakespeare’s Cassius,87the fault lies not in our envi-ronment but in ourselves. Fearing the loss of unrealistic privileges,the white supremacist resists racial integration, the male chauvinistimpedes women’s empowerment, and homophobes demonize the gaycommunity. Yet by “cutting down stubborn stupidity” of discrimina-tion they surrender nothing except their own habituated delusions. Ifwe transcend anthropocentrism for an encompassing sense of intri-cate interconnections among life forms, the possibility for creativeinteraction replaces a human-imposed hierarchical isolation. Our inti-mate involvement in nature offers freedom (distinct from free will)under Benedict Spinoza’s uniquely counterintuitive definition ofacting by necessity, what Daoists might call ziran自然.88

Such movements are already under way. Rather than championinghumans as “supra-biological animals,” Stephen Kellert argues “thenatural world is the substrate on which we must build our existence.. . . [D]ependence on nature has shaped and continues to shape ourcapacities to feel, reason, think, master complexity, discover, create,heal, and be healthy.”89 William Myers describes the environmentallysensitive Bio Design movement as “the intersection of creative andtechnical fields [that] has enabled new aesthetic possibilities and mayhelp address the growing urgency to build and manufacture usingecologically sound methods.”90

An alliance between Buddhism and Confucianism via Li’s recon-struction project may well realize his goal of the “integration ofhumans and the cosmos,” whereby “all of society and all of humanityare living in a harmonious state with nature.”91 Stagnant sediment


remains subject to the constant cycle of renewal and impermanence(anitya) in which the human species is an unquestionable participantdue to pratıtya-samutpada, just as Li speaks of the “continual decon-struction and re-creation” that exists alongside “construction andsedimentation.”92 The wisdom to see our interconnectedness engen-ders the compassion to engage in the world beyond the confines ofhuman sedimentation. In fact, Inada suggests that Buddhism’s MiddleWay is “perhaps the noblest expression and status of humanism.”93 Bybroadening the context of our discourse beyond the human species,Buddhism can address Li’s question,“How can we construct a healthyhuman psychology and a healthy society of human beings?”94

SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITYSan Diego, California

Endnotes

Acknowledgment of Intellectual Credits and Rights: A rudimentary version of this paperwas presented under the title “Li Zehou’s Sedimentation in Chinese Aesthetics: Confu-cian and Buddhist Perspectives” at a session on Confucian Ethics and Phenomenology ofMind sponsored by the International Society for Chinese Philosophy at the AmericanPhilosophical Association Pacific Division Meeting in San Diego, April 22, 2011. I amgreatly indebted to Professor Chung-ying Cheng for the opportunity to participate in thispanel, as well as for his insightful comments on my presentation. His encouragementinspired me to expand my research into this topic.Thanks also are due to the reviewers fortheir thoughtful suggestions, as well as Managing Editor Linyu Gu and Assistant EditorTimothy Connolly for their diligent oversight and unflagging support throughout thepublication process.

1. Thomé H. Fang, The Chinese View of Life: The Philosophy of ComprehensiveHarmony (Hong Kong: The Union Press, 1971), 68.

2. “Nature, considered in an aesthetical judgment as might that has no dominion over us,is dynamically sublime . . .” in Immanuel Kant, Critique of Judgment, trans. JohnHenry Bernard (New York: Hafner, 1961), 99. “Fine art . . . only achieves its highesttask when it has taken its place in the same sphere with religion and philosophy, andhas become simply a mode of revealing consciousness and bringing to utterance theDivine Nature, the deepest interests of humanity, and the most comprehensive truthsof the mind”; Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, Introductory Lectures on Aesthetics, inPhilosophers on Art from Kant to the Postmodernists, ed. Christopher Kul-Want (NewYork: Columbia University Press, 2010), 43.

3. Li Zehou, The Chinese Aesthetic Tradition, trans. Maija Bell Samei (Honolulu: Uni-versity of Hawaii Press, 2009), 221, 189.

4. Li, The Chinese Aesthetic Tradition, 94; Li Zehou, “Subjectivity and ‘Subjectality’: AResponse,” Philosophy East and West 49, no. 2 (1999): 179.

5. Li, The Chinese Aesthetic Tradition, 224.6. Ibid., 94.7. Ludwig Wittgenstein, Philosophical Investigations, trans. G. E. M. Anscombe (New

York: Macmillan, 1958), 5e.8. Li, “Subjectivity and ‘Subjectality,’” 181.9. Li, The Chinese Aesthetic Tradition, 174.

10. Multiple references to “the wisdom embracing all species” are found in Mahayanatexts, most especially the Lotus Sutra.


11. Li, “Subjectivity and ‘Subjectality,’” 174.12. Li, The Chinese Aesthetic Tradition, xi.13. Li, “Subjectivity and ‘Subjectality,’” 179.14. Jane Cauvel, “The Transformative Power of Art: Li Zehou’s Aesthetic Theory,” Phi-

losophy East and West 49, no. 2 (1999): 158.15. Li, “Subjectivity and ‘Subjectality,’” 179.16. Ibid., 178.17. Ibid., 177.18. Cauvel, “The Transformative Power of Art,” 163.19. Li, “Subjectivity and ‘Subjectality,’” 182.20. Li Zehou, The Path of Beauty:A Study of Chinese Aesthetics, trans. Song Lizeng (Hong

Kong: Oxford University Press, 1994), 107.21. Ibid., 110.22. Ibid., 113.23. Ibid., 126.24. Ibid., 183.25. Arthur F. Wright, Buddhism in Chinese History (Stanford: Stanford University Press,

1959), 3. Erik Zürcher goes even further in his provocatively entitled volume, TheBuddhist Conquest of China: The Spread and Adaptation of Buddhism in EarlyMedieval China (Leiden: Brill, 1972).

26. Li, The Chinese Aesthetic Tradition, 161.27. Ibid., 192.28. Li Zehou and Jane Cauvel, Four Essays on Aesthetics: Toward a Global View (New

York: Lexington Books, 2006), 122.29. Li, The Chinese Aesthetic Tradition, 165.30. Li Zehou, “Modernization and the Confucian World,” paper presented at Colorado

College’s 125th Anniversary Symposium, “Cultures in the 21st Century: Conflicts andConvergences,” Colorado Springs, February 5, 1999.

31. Wing-tsit Chan, trans., Reflections on Things at Hand: The Neo-Confucian Anthology(New York: Columbia University Press, 1967), 278–82.

32. Chan, Reflections on Things at Hand, 285.33. Li and Cauvel, Four Essays on Aesthetics, 122.34. Charles Wei-hsun Fu and Sandra A. Wawrytko, trans., “The Daoist (Taoist) School”

in Chinese Philosophy in Cultural Context: Selected Readings from EssentialSources, ed. Sandra A. Wawrytko (San Diego: Montezuma Publishing, 2007),111.

35. Li and Cauvel, Four Essays on Aesthetics, 4.36. Zhuangzi, Chapter 2, trans. Charles Wei-hsun Fu (unpublished manuscript). Charac-

terizing this view as “the nondifferentiation of self and world, life and death, gain andloss, truth and illusion,” Li is skeptical of its general practicality; Li, The ChineseAesthetic Tradition, 90.

37. A deadly political competition arose in the Period of Disunity (220–589) when aself-styled “moral majority” of conformists in the School of Names (Ming Jiao名教)assumed the Confucian mantle, while the dissenting voices of the Daoist-leaningNaturalists (Ziran Xuepai自然學派) reflected Daoism’s evolution from philosophy toreligion via the Dark Learning (Xuan Xue玄學) movement.

38. Kenneth K. Inada, “Some Basic Misconceptions of Buddhism,” International Philo-sophical Quarterly 9, no. 1 (1969): 116–7.

39. Li, The Chinese Aesthetic Traditions, 168.40. William Edward Soothill and Lewis Hodous, A Dictionary of Chinese Buddhist Terms

(London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner & Company, 1934), 415a.41. Ibid., 243b. An affirmative use of dr·s·t·i occurs in the first element of the Noble

Eightfold Path, Right Understanding or Views (samyag-dr·s·t·i, Pali samma-dit·t·hi).42. Jiddu Krishnamurti, Total Freedom: The Essential Krishnamurti (San Francisco:

Harper, 1996), 184.43. Ibid., 184.44. Analects, 2: 4.45. Ibid., 17: 19.


46. Wing-tsit Chan, ed. and trans., Sourcebook in Chinese Philosophy (Princeton: Prince-ton University Press, 1963), 429.

47. Li and Cauvel, Four Essays on Aesthetics, 8.48. Li, The Chinese Aesthetic Tradition, 174.49. Ibid., 161.50. Although Li discusses the poems of Wang Wei 王維 (699–759) as illustrations of

“Chan sense” (The Chinese Aesthetic Tradition, 164–5), Chan Master Sheng Yen聖嚴(1930–2009) suggests that Wang Wei’s work indicates only “an artist’s enlightenment.”The lingering trace of a self implies that “the experience is grounded in existence, notemptiness.” Sheng Yen, Zen Wisdom: Knowing and Doing (Elmhurst: Dharma DrumPublications, 1993), 312.

51. Sheng-yen, Faith in Mind (Elmhurst: Dharma Drum Publications, 1987), 57.52. Li, The Chinese Aesthetic Tradition, 166.53. Stephen Addiss, ed., Zen Sourcebook: Traditional Documents from China, Korea, and

Japan (Indianapolis: Hackett, 2008), 50.54. Ibid.55. Ibid., 51.56. Ibid.57. Li, The Chinese Aesthetic Tradition, 164.58. Ruth Fuller Sasaki, Yoshita Iriya, and Dana R. Fraser, trans., The Recorded Sayings

of Layman P’ang: A Ninth Century Zen Classic (New York: Weatherhill, 1971),79.

59. Sasaki et al., The Recorded Sayings of Layman P’ang, 43.60. Ibid., 64.61. Ibid., 74.62. Addiss, “Selected Poems by Chinese Nuns,” Zen Sourcebook, 63.63. Ibid., 65.64. Ibid., 66.65. Ibid., 67.66. Jonathan Christopher Cleary, trans., A Buddha from Korea: The Zen Teachings of

T’aego (Boston: Shambhala, 1988), 66.67. Notable exceptions among philosophers include Derek Parfit (Reasons and Persons,

1986) and Thomas Metzinger (Mark R. Leary and June Price Tangney, eds., Being NoOne: The Self-Model Theory of Subjectivity, New York: Guilford Press, 2012). Scien-tists have been less hesitant to broach this topic. See Nobel laureate Francis Crick(The Astonishing Hypothesis: The Scientific Search for the Soul, 1994) and Daniel C.Dennett (Consciousness Explained, 1991). Li himself declares “each person’s indi-vidual sensuous existence, each person’s ‘being,’ is completely and utterly unique”; Li,The Chinese Aesthetic Tradition, 224.

68. Constantine Sedikides and John J. Skowronski, “Evolution of the Symbolic Self:Issues and Prospects,” in Handbook of Self and Identity, 594. Retrieved December 11,2013, from http://www.southampton.ac.uk/~crsi/evololutionofthesymbolicself.pdf.

69. See the work of cognitive anthropologist and psychologist Scott Atran, In Gods WeTrust: The Evolutionary Landscape of Religion (New York: Oxford University Press,2002).

70. Li, The Chinese Aesthetic Tradition, 191–2.71. Ibid., 162.72. Cauvel, “The Transformative Power of Art,” 162.73. Li, “Subjectivity and ‘Subjectality,’” 176.74. For more detailed examples of human overreach, see Sandra A. Wawrytko, “The

Viability (Dao) and Virtuosity (De) of Daoist Ecology: Reversion (Fu) as Renewal,”Journal of Chinese Philosophy 32, no. 2 (2005): 89–103.

75. The use of tools, in some cases even language, has been documented among nonhu-man species, ranging from mammals and birds to insects and fish.

76. Sedikides and Skowronski, “Evolution of the Symbolic Self,” 595.77. Theodore Roszak, “Raging against the Machine,” Los Angeles Times, January 24,

2004. Retrieved December 11, 2013, from http://articles.latimes.com/2004/jan/28/opinion/oe-roszak28.


78. For example, he rejected focus groups because “people don’t know what they wantuntil you show it to them”; interview with Business Week, May 25, 1998. RetrievedDecember 11, 2013, from http://www.businessweek.com/1998/21/b3579165.htm.

79. Steve Jobs, Commencement address, June 12, 2005, Stanford Report, June 14, 2005.Retrieved December 12, 2013, from http://news.stanford.edu/news/2005/june15/jobs-061505.html.

80. See Immanuel Kant,“An Old Question Raised Again: Is the Human Race ConstantlyProgressing?” (1798) On History (Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1963); like Li, Kantanswers this question in the affirmative. Mao Zedong, 1944 speech to the inauguralmeeting of the Natural Science Research Society of the Border Region, included inQuotations from Chairman Mao Tsetung (Beijing: Waiwen Chubanshe, 1972), 204–5.

81. The Songs of the Red Flag, in Kai-yu Hsu, trans., Twentieth Century Chinese Poetry(Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1970), 410.

82. “Beautiful China Starts from Healthy Breath,” People’s Daily Online, 14:14, January14, 2013. Retrieved December 11, 2013, from http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90882/8091247.html.

83. An irrigation project constructed in China’s Sichuan province in the third centurybce, which continues to function in harmony with the environment.

84. Chapter 10 of the Daxue commentary; Charles Wei-hsun Fu and Sandra A.Wawrytko,trans., in Wawrytko, Chinese Philosophy in Cultural Context, 228. Readings withintroductory materials, compiler/editor (San Diego: Montezuma Publishing, 2007),228.

85. Kim Sisup, “On Producing Wealth,” in Sourcebook of Korean Civilization: Volume IFrom Early Times to the Sixteenth Century, ed. Peter H. Lee (New York: ColumbiaUniversity Press, 1993), 588.

86. Daxue, 7.87. “The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars,/But in ourselves, that we are underlings”;

William Shakespeare, Julius Caesar, 1: 2: 140–1.88. “That thing is called free, which exists solely by the necessity of its own nature, and of

which the action is determined by itself alone. On the other hand, that thing isnecessary, or rather constrained, which is determined by something external to itselfto a fixed and definite method of existence or action.” Benedict Spinoza, Ethics, I,trans. Robert Harvey Monro Elwes, in The Chief Works of Benedict de Spinoza, vol.I (New York: Dover Publications, 1955), 46. Paralleling Buddhism’s nondualism,Spinoza assumes there is nothing external to the reality he identifies as Substance.

89. Stephen Kellert, Birthright: People and Nature in the Modern World (New Haven:Yale University Press, 2012); excerpt available at http://www.npr.org/books/titles/169521814/birthright-people-and-nature-in-the-modern-world?tab=excerpt#excerpt.Kellert has proposed an International Institute for Biophilic Studies at Yale Univer-sity’s School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, whose mission is “to understandand promote the role of the natural environment in human physical and mentalhealth, productivity and wellbeing” (http://www.stephenrkellert.net/biophilic-studies.html).

90. William Myers, course description for “Nature Design: From Inspiration to Integra-tion” at MoMA, fall 2012; http://william-myers.com/. Myers recently publishedBiodesign: Nature Science Creativity (New York: The Museum of Modern Art, 2012).

91. Li and Cauvel, Four Essays on Aesthetics, 66.92. Li, The Chinese Aesthetic Tradition, 224.93. Inada, “Some Basic Misconceptions of Buddhism,” 117.94. Li and Cauvel, Four Essays on Aesthetics, 182.
