Howard Wang
Professor de Bary
Asian Civilizations – East Asia V2002
2 December 2003
A great era in East Asian history came to a close with the decline of the Tang
dynasty in the ninth century. The end of the Tang, though nominally differentiated, was,
in fact, only a portion of a much larger change in the East Asian realm. The fall of the
dynasty brought with it the end of China’s expansionistic drive and led to the
deterioration of Buddhism as the compelling ideological force of the age. With China’s
political transition to the Song dynasty, the focus of the nation shifted from expansionism
to internal economic, social, and cultural development. In order to address the concerns
of the period, Neo-Confucianism came as an answer to Buddhism. From the eleventh
century to the nineteenth century, Neo-Confucianism would grow and develop into an
ideology that would not only shape the face of East Asia’s social, economic, and political
climate, but as a principle that unified East Asian morality under the same moral precepts.
Buddhism survived during the Tang dynasty due to its expansionistic nature and
its accessibility to the masses. However as China evolved into a state more concerned
with internal development, Neo-Confucianism came as a “new” concept which provided
what the new era needed. The success of Neo-Confucianism can be attributed to various
factors. For one thing, Neo-Confucianism addressed both social and political concerns;
whereas Buddhism’s inherent adaptability was rooted in its detachment from such secular
affairs. Therefore, it could only be relied upon for personal spiritual release from
suffering, and not as a solution to social and political matters.
The emergence and subsequent prominence of a new class of literati in the Song
characterized the focus of the state on a civil administration rather than a military based
government. With the Song focused on establishing a civil rule, the need for increased
scholarship among the masses became apparent. The technological advent of the printing
press facilitated the spread of secular education and scholarship. As a result of this now
widely available recorded knowledge, academies of secular learning sprung up
throughout China and replaced the Buddhist temples of the preceding age as the
intellectual hubs of the nation. Furthermore, the Song reformation of the Civil Service
Examinations further underscored the overwhelming demand for schooling and an
organized system of education. Efforts to satisfy this overwhelming demand for
education were what brought about the development of Neo-Confucianism.
The groundwork for Neo-Confucianism was laid out during the opening years of
the Song by a man named Hu Yuan. Hu fashioned a venerated curriculum of study
during the tenth century which focused on both practical learning and the study of the
Confucian classics. His emphasis on practical learning and technical specialization was a
testament to his belief in the pragmatic application of knowledge. In the same manner,
Hu emphasized the practicality and functionality of Confucian teachings as timeless
principles that are enduringly applicable in one’s own time. Hu’s emphasis on the
“structure, function, and literary expression” characteristic of Confucianism belied the
Buddhist principles of ethereality and incommunicability of the truth. This new system
of learning developed by Hu came to be described as “practical” learning, as opposed to
the “empty” learning of Buddhism and even that of Classical Confucianism, which was
criticized based on its focus on impractical, encyclopedic knowledge and its lack of any
moral purpose or application.
A key difference between Classical Confucianism and Neo-Confucianism was the
addition of the metaphysical facet in the new philosophy that developed alongside the
classical focus on the social and moral self. This spiritual component added to its
versatility and further strengthened the argument put forth by subscribers of the ideology
against competing ideologies, most notably that of Buddhism. This new metaphysics
attempted to structure a philosophy to explain human nature in a way consistent with the
teachings of Confucius and Mencius, all while meeting the challenge from other
metaphysical schools of thought. The Song Neo-Confucians faced two essential concerns
in their formation of this new metaphysical philosophy. Firstly, they needed to affirm the
Confucian conception of human nature as essentially good in a cosmological manner.
Secondly, it was essential that they address the need for the cultivation of a moral and
good self by disavowing established Buddhist doctrine regarding the insignificance and
emptiness of self. The solution they developed in order to address these concerns was
based on the conception of an interrelation and dynamic correlation between the concepts
of principle (li) and material-force (qi), where principle corresponded with the abstract
element of human nature, while material-force was described as the tangible, material
manifestation of principle. This new doctrine of human nature brought about the
characterization of the Neo-Confucian sage as, not only a morally just person, but as a
spiritual individual concerned with both the social affairs of the world and the spiritual
integrity of the mind.
Yet another defining distinction between Neo-Confucianism and Classical
Confucianism was the way each philosophy portrayed the role of the Confucian sage.
Classical Confucianism focused on the morality and sagehood of the leader or king in the
political and social realms of society. However, a fundamental component of NeoConfucianism was its universality. In this respect, Neo-Confucians promoted the idea of
sagehood being available and attainable by everyone though the employment of a
standard neoclassical curriculum of schooling accessible by all.
The way in which to attain this sagehood had been discussed and illustrated by
works produced by numerous Neo-Confucian scholars, including Zhou Dunyi, the Cheng
brothers, and Zhang Zai. Of these scholars, the most important contributor to NeoConfucianism is a man named Zhu Xi, who is recognized as the synthesizer of the NeoConfucianism that came to be accepted in China, and eventually throughout East Asia,
from the twelfth century to the nineteenth century. Zhu Xi took the concepts of NeoConfucianism presented by his predecessors and elaborated on them in such a way as to
elucidate and further delve into the nature of these principles. His studies on and
interpretations of these separate works came together to form one system of thought in
which Neo-Confucianism would become based upon. Specifically, Zhu Xi’s philosophy
was based extensively on the doctrine of principle (presented by Cheng Yi), which serves
as a unifying concept in his philosophy. Zhu Xi’s most lofty contribution came in the
form of his compilation of the Four Books. His Four Books consisted of the Analects,
the Mencius, the Great Learning and the Mean. Although the Analects and the Mencius
were already important works in any Confucian curriculum of education, the Great
Learning and the Mean were not focused upon until Zhu Xi’s inclusion of these works in
his anthology gave them prominence in Neo-Confucian studies. Zhu Xi spent much of
his life focused on writing commentaries for these four works, including prefaces for the
Great Learning and the Mean. It’s important to note that his writings were not
excessively technical or philosophical to the point where only the learned elite could
comprehend their meaning. His purpose in composing such writings was to make sure
that the didactic content contained in his work and compilation would be able to reach the
widest possible audience. Zhu Xi’s emphasis on the importance of education is clearly
apparent in his writings, most appreciably in his preface to the Great Learning. In his
preface, he stressed the importance of a system of universal education where learning
could be brought to all. He presented a very well-defined process in which an individual
could attain the Neo-Confucian ideal of enlightenment. This process consisted of three
guiding principles, which discussed the importance of recognizing, cultivating, and
harnessing the innate goodness of one’s self. From these three principles, Zhu Xi goes on
to present his Eight Steps, which consecutively and systematically lays out a procedure of
self-cultivation for the noble person. Of equal importance to his preface to the Great
Learning was Zhu Xi’s preface to the Mean. Wherein he discusses the human mind and
the mind of the Way and further elaborates on the correlation between the Message of the
Mind (xinfa) and the Way.
To his credit, Zhu Xi’s Four Books, with his prefaces and commentaries, came to
be regarded as a “core curriculum” of sorts in the Neo-Confucian schools of learning.
Due to the universal nature of his teachings, his ideas and practices easily spread with
ease. The applicability of his teachings on every level of education and the basic,
systematic nature of his texts, along with the availability of printing, supported the need
for a universal education as recognized by Song reformers.
The pertinence of Neo-Confucian teachings was not recognized merely in the
Chinese sphere. Neo-Confucian ideals were quickly accepted by the rest of East Asia
due to their adaptability and universal applicability, as opposed to Classical
Confucianism, which usually focused on issues that were only of concern to the Chinese
mind. The universality of Neo-Confucianism not only contributed greatly to the rapid
spread across East Asia, but, more importantly, it allowed each country to apply the
principles of the philosophy in such a way as to augment their cultural identities as
opposed to sacrificing that identity. Buddhism’s universality can be attributed to its
parallel, but distinct, development alongside a culture. Neo-Confucianism, on the other
hand, was almost completely integrated into the social, political, and spiritual facets of a
culture, while it still allowed each country to maintain its specificity and cultural integrity.
However the success and proliferation of this new form of Confucianism to the
rest of East Asia cannot be merely attributed to the soundness and applicability of the
Neo-Confucian doctrine alone. The spread of Neo-Confucianism can largely be
attributed to multiple chance historical occurrences. Neo-Confucianism was brought to
northern China when the Mongol conquerors captured Zhao Fu and installed him in an
academy in Beijing. From there, Korean princes, who had been held captive by the
Mongols, studied Neo-Confucianism in academies in Beijing and eventually brought the
ideology back to Korea during the Koryo dynasty. Neo-Confucianism then spread into
Japan by means of Japanese Zen monks who brought the philosophy back to Japan. The
ease with which Neo-Confucianism proliferated throughout East Asia is a testament to
the universality of its teachings. Therefore, as opposed to Classical Confucianism, which
was rooted in unmistakably Chinese values, Neo-Confucianism was based on universally
applicable ideals.
In Korea, Neo-Confucian principles became of particular interest only during the
closing years of the Koryo dynasty. However, in the subsequent establishment of the
Choson dynasty, Neo-Confucianism developed into an ideology so crucial to and
engrained in Korean social, political, and spiritual affairs that it rivaled, and even
surpassed, that of the Chinese. The Choson chose Zhu Xi’s Neo-Confucian principles as
the basis for their political philosophy and were intent on basing the reformation of their
state and society upon Neo-Confucian teachings. The Choson’s founders took the
teachings of the Great Learning as presented by Zhu Xi and formulated a sociopolitical
system based upon a strict interpretation of the Great Learning as a systematic curriculum
for moral edification. Furthermore, the acceptance of Neo-Confucianism came as a
reaction against a Buddhism that saw its fair share of corruption in Korea. This condition,
along with the credibility of Neo-Confucianism as an instructional, practical, moral, and
spiritual ideology allowed its rapid acceptance and prominence in Korean society even
before any state involvement. With this government mandated educational system in
place and the implementation of a Civil Service Examination system, all of which were
based on the content of Zhu Xi’s Four Books, Neo-Confucianism was now completely
incorporated into Korea’s social structure. The Koreans not only accepted this NeoConfucian teaching as a mandated state orthodoxy, but integrated Zhu Xi’s principles
into their lifestyles on a level appreciably beyond that of the Chinese.
However, as Neo-Confucianism further developed and differentiated into
additional schools of thought (more specifically that of Wang Yang-Ming), Korean NeoConfucianists remained loyal and dedicated to Zhu Xi’s teachings. During the reign of
the Ming dynasty in the sixteenth century, Wang Yang-Ming suggested an alternative
interpretation of the Learning of the Mind and Heart as established by Zhu Xi. Wang’s
new methodology interpreted the Learning of the Mind and Heart in a more intuitive and
innate manner as opposed to Zhu Xi’s interpretation, which focused on the perception of
the existentiality of things. Wang’s philosophy became accepted as the new School of
the Mind and Heart as Zhu Xi’s philosophy remained as the School of Principle by the
majority of Neo-Confucians up until the nineteenth century.
Wang Yang-Ming’s principles, though widely contested and thoroughly rejected
by the Koreans, found acceptance among some of the Tokugawa Japanese. The actual
popularization and subsequent establishment of Neo-Confucianism as the official
orthodoxy of Japan occurred during the rule of Tokugawa Ieyasu. Tokugawa Ieyasu
turned to Neo-Confucianism due to its applicability and morally didactic content. Under
Tokugawa, Hayashi Razan firmly established Neo-Confucianism as the official, courtsanctioned teaching of the Tokugawa Era, adapting Neo-Confucian philosophy for use in
the government. Hayashi was a vital proponent of the School of Principle and also gave
great consideration to the study of Confucian Classics, which led to a renewed interest in
Japanese history. While Hayashi was recognized for his adherence to the School of
Principle, Kumazawa Banzan is noted for bringing the Wang Yang-Ming School of Mind
and Heart into the political philosophy of Tokugawa Japan. The Japanese further took
advantage of the adaptability of Neo-Confucian teachings and applied it to many secular
forms of learning. Neo-Confucianism was involved in the development empirical and
humanistic sciences by such important figures as Kaibara Ekken in biology and Miura
Baien and Kaiho Seiryo in economics. Though the secular application of NeoConfucianism in Japan contrasts with the adoption of Neo-Confucianism in the rest of
East Asia, it still remains as a crucial facet in the development of Japanese society.
Although Neo-Confucianism spread throughout East Asia and eventually
developed somewhat independently within the three nations, the founding principles and
unifying tenets of the philosophy still held true in each version. Clearly, NeoConfucianism impacted greatly on all three civilizations, as each governing body
officially accepted some form of the philosophy. The Koreans adopted NeoConfucianism wholeheartedly and accepted its principles as an inherent part of their lives.
The Chinese, who are, essentially, the progenitors of Neo-Confucianism, did not adhere
to the philosophy as adamantly and passionately as the Koreans did, but still accepted it
as the defining doctrine in their political philosophy and social structure. The Japanese
clearly integrated Neo-Confucian principles into their politics, but did not
circumstantially instill the philosophy in the people as the Chinese and Koreans did with
their Civil Service Examinations. Although the degree of instillation in the political and
social realms of each nation differed, Neo-Confucianism was an undoubtedly unifying
force in East Asia. The moral and practical ideals embraced by Neo-Confucianism were
one and the same among these three countries despite their relatively distinctive lines of
cultural development, which is both a testament to the credibility of Neo-Confucianism
as a political and spiritual ideology and to the common origin of the East Asian realms.
The universally applicable tenets of moral responsibility and intellectual cultivation of
the self were appropriate and acknowledged by nearly all of pre-modern East Asia from
the Song reformers to the Mongol invaders and from the Choson Koreans to the
Tokugawa Japanese and served as the uniting principle of the age.
Works Cited
de Bary, Wm. Theodore, and Irene Bloom, eds. Sources of Chinese Tradition. 2nd ed.,
Vol. I. New York: Columbia UP, 1999.
de Bary, Wm. Theodore. East Asian Civilizations. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1988.
Hooker, Richard. Tokugawa Neo-Confucianism. 6 Jun. 1999. Washington State
University. 1996. <http://www.wsu.edu:8080/~dee/TOKJAPAN/NEO.HTM>.
Lee, Peter, and Wm. Theodore de Bary, eds. Sources of Korean Tradition. Vol. I. New
York: Columbia UP, 1997.
Schirokauer, Conrad. A Brief History of Chinese and Japanese Civilization. 2nd ed. New
York: Wadsworth Thomson Learning, 1989.