Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

The philosophy of filiality in ancient China : ideological development of ancestor worship in the Zhanguo… Ikezawa, Masaru 1994

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-ubc_1994-894113.pdf [ 18.65MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0099232.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0099232-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0099232-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0099232-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0099232-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0099232-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0099232-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0099232-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0099232.ris

Full Text

THE PHILOSOPHY OF FILIALITY IN ANCIENT CHINA Ideological Development of Ancestor Worship in the Zhanguo Period by MASARU IKEZAWA B. A. The University of Tokyo, 1982 M.A. The University of Tokyo, 1984 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (Department of Asian Studies) We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA April 1994 (c) Masaru Ikezawa, 1994 In presentin g thi s thesi s i n partia l fulfilmen t o f th e requirement s fo r a n advance d degree a t th e Universit y o f Britis h Columbia , I  agre e tha t th e Librar y shal l mak e i t freely availabl e fo r referenc e an d study . I  furthe r agre e tha t permissio n fo r extensiv e copying o f thi s thesi s fo r scholarl y purpose s ma y b e grante d b y th e hea d o f m y department o r b y hi s o r he r representatives. . I t i s understoo d tha t copyin g o r publication o f thi s thesi s fo r financia l gai n shal l no t b e allowe d withou t m y writte n permission. (Signature) Department o f _ j L s ± a n _ S i u d l a s The Universit y o f Britis h Columbi a Vancouver, Canad a Date Apri l -2? , / ? ? f DE-6 (2/88 ) ABSTRACT Filiality [xiao) has been a significant concept in Chinese culture. Its significance is shown by the fact that its idea was elevated to a system of philosophy by Confucians in the Zhanguo period (475-221 B.C.E.). The purpose of this study is to clarify why filiality was important and what the philosophy of filiality essentially meant. Filiality was not merely a familial ethic. In the Western Zhou period (the 11th c. to 770 B.C.E.), it meant sacrifices to ancestors. Filiality toward fatherhood was essentially obedience to headship of lineage groups, and it was expressed in ancestor worship. When lineage gradually collapsed in the Chunqiu period [770-475 B.C.E.), its significance must have been restricted. In fact, however, filiality was given a new meaning by Zhanguo Confucians. First, Confucius emphasized the mental aspect of filiality, and then Mencius thought of filiality as the basis from which general ethics were generated. The various ideas of filiality were collected in a book: the Book of Filiality. This book, presenting the dichotomy between love and reverence, argued that a father-son relationship had an element shared by a monarch-retainer relationship and that filiality should be shifted into loyalty. The essential achievement of this philosophy was the recognition of the dualistic nature of human beings; any human relationship was a social relation between two social roles as well as an emotional connection between two characters. The former was the basis for culture and society. It was the aspect of culture inherent in human nature that should be developed to bring about social justice. This dualism was derived from the ambiguity of fatherhood in ancestor worship. As ancestor symbolized the social role of lineage headship, the philosophy of filiality symbolically connected fatherhood to the social role of authority in general. Filiality was identified with devotion to the i i absolute basis for humans and society that was symbolized by fatherhood. This thesis, analyzing ancient Chinese philosophy of filiality, presents a hypothesis concerning the essential structure of ancestor worship, which can be summarized as the symbolism representing higher levels of authority on the basis of parental authority. i i i TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ii TABLE OF CONTENTS iv LIST OF CHARTS viii LIST OF FIGURES ix ACKNOWLEDGEMENT x INTRODUCTION 1 The anthropological theor ies of ancestor worship 3 CHAPTER ONE: FILIALITY AND ANCESTOR WORSHIP IN THE WESTERN ZHOU AND CHUNQIU PERIOD 13 (1) Filiality in the Western Zhou Bronze Inscriptions 13 (2) Filiality in the Chunqiu period 25 (3) The Functions of Ancestral Rites Recognized by the People of Western Zhou 29 C4) The Function of Ancestral Rites in the Chunqiu Period 40 (5) Conclusion 48 (6) A Supplement: Filiality in the Zuozhuan 51 CHAPTER TWO: THE PHILOSOPHY OF FILIALITY BY ZHANGUO THINKERS 58 CI) Filiality in the Analects 59 (2) Ideas of Filiality in the Writ ings of Mencius 82 (3) Ideas of Filiality in the Writ ings of Xun Qing 102 CHAPTER THREE: THE COMPOSITION OF THE BOOK OF FILIALITY AND ITS IDEAS 117 CI) The Appearance and Circulation of the Book of Filiality 121 i v The New Text and the Old Text of the Book of Filiality 121 Documents t h a t ci te the Book of Filiality 132 Watanabe's Theory 141 Commentaries on the Book of Filiality in the Western Han Period 144 C2) The Philosophy of the Book of Filiality 146 (A) The Contents of Each Chapter 147 The Chapter on The Chapter on The Chapter on The Chapter on The Chapter on The Chapter on The Chapter on The Chapter on The Chapter on The Chapter on The Chapter on The Chapter on The Chapter on The Chapter on The Chapter on The Chapter on The Chapter on The Chapter on The Chapter on The Chapter on The Chapter on ' the S tar t ing Point and Basic Principle" 147 ' the Son of Heaven" 148 ' the Lords" 148 ' the Ministers" 148 ' the Officials" 148 ' the Common People" 148 ' the Equality of Filiality" 148 ' the Three Power" 152 'Filial Government" 153 "the Government of the Sage" 154 ' the Grace of Pa ren t s ' Beget t ing" 156 ' the Superior and the Inferior of Filiality" 160 ' the Prac t ice of Filiality" 162 ' the Five Punishments" 162 "the Right Way, Fur ther Explained" 163 ' the Highest Virtue, Fur ther Explained" 166 'Evocation and Response" 169 'Perpe tua t ing the Name, Fur ther Explained" 171 "Household" 171 ' the Duty of Remonstrance" 175 'Serving the Ruler" 177 The Chapter on "Mourning for Pa ren t s " 177 CB) The Philosophical Motifs of the Book of Filiality 181 Filial Government 181 The Extension of the Ethics among Kinship relations 181 How to Describe the Essential Quali ty of Filiality 184 The Contents of Filial Piety 186 The Dichotomy between Love and Reverence or Veneration 186 Fatherhood as the Symbolic Expression of Supreme Being 194 The Motif of the Response be tween Heaven and People 195 The Motif of Remonstrance 196 The Three Classes of Society 196 CHAPTER FOUR: THE DOCUMENTS RELATED TO THE BOOK OF FILIALITY 198 [1) "The Great Filiality" in the Dadai Li.ji, a Pa r t of "the Meaning of Rites" in the Book of Rites and "the Filial Behavior" in the Liishi Chunqiu 199 "The Filial Behavior" 201 "The Great Filiality" and "the Meaning of Rites" 210 [2) "The Basic Filiality of Zengzi" of the Dadai Liji 218 [3) "The Establishing Filiality of Zengzi" and "Zengzi's Serving Pa ren t s " of the Dadai Liji 225 "The Establishing Filiality" 226 "The Serving Pa ren t s " 230 (4) The History of the Documents related with Filiality 236 (5) The Philosophical Background of the Philosophy of Filiality 245 (6) The Historical Background of the Philosophy of Filiality 252 v i CONCLUSION 268 NOTES 273 Notes for Introduction 273 Notes for Chapter One 275 Notes for Chapter Two 284 Notes for Chapter Three 314 Notes for Chapter Four 333 BIBLIOGRAPHY 346 APPENDIX ONE: REFERENCE FOR CHAPTER ONE 371 Reference I: The Usage of Filiality in Bronze Inscriptions 372 Examples from the Western Zhou period 372 Examples from the Chunqiu period 396 Reference II: The Purposes of Bronze Vessels Expressed in Bronze Inscriptions 408 The Examples in the Western Zhou period 408 The Examples in the Chunqiu period 418 APPENDIX TWO: TEXTUAL PROBLEMS OF THE BOOK OF FILIALITY 426 Notes for Appendix 436 • v i i LIST OF CHARTS Chart One: Attendants at Ancestral Rites in the Western Zhou period 40 Chart Two: Attendants at Ancestral Rites in the Chunqiu Period 44 Chart Three: The relationship between the Old Text and the New Text of the Book of Filiality 122 Chart Four: The Relationship between "the Meaning of Rites", "the Great Filiality" and "the Filial Behavior" 200 Chart Five: The Relationship among the Three Documents 202 v i i i LIST OF FIGURES Figure One: The Graph for Xiao in the Bronze Inscriptions 14 Figure Two: Map 116 1 3 C ACKNOWLEDGMENT Firs t of all, I would like to sincerely express my g ra t i t ude to professor Daniel Overmyer, to whom my s tudy owes a g r ea t deal, both for his comments and for his correction of my English expressions. Also, I am grateful to professor Ken'ichi Takashima, whose sugges t ions were helpful for me, professor Je r ry Schmidt, professor Philip Harding and professor John Wood, who agreed to serve a supervisory committee member or univers i ty examiners. Finally, I wish to express my appreciat ion to my friends who corrected my English and encouraged me to complete the thesis. 3 C INTRODUCTION In the history of Chinese philosophy, the Zhanguo H H period (475-221 B.C.) is one of the most important and in te res t ing eras . Many th inkers discussed many subjec ts and presented various ideas about them, ideas t h a t have been important throughout the Chinese history. Xiao ^ or filiality was one of such subjects . Xiao, which is usually t rans la ted as filial piety, is recognized to be a moral code be tween pa ren t s and children, or especially children's du ty toward their pa ren t s . But the re seems to be room for reconsidering this recognition. If xiao simply indicated affection and respect between pa ren t s and children, t h a t is, if it belonged to na tura l human feelings, the concept of xiao could not be so important a philosophical subject , for if so anybody can easily be filial. Important philosophical subjects a re expected to be rela ted to the crucial conception of cul ture and society, which defines the significance of human beings and es tabl ishes motivat ions for their cul tural /social act ivi ty. Filiality was an extraordinari ly important subjec t in the Chinese philosophy. This can be proved by the fact t ha t the Confucian orthodox canons included the Book of Filiality (Xiaojing #$§D, for which many volumes of commentaries were wri t ten . In fact, t he emphasis on filiality was a dis t inct ive fea tu re of Chinese cul ture . Therefore, t he principal purpose of this d isser ta t ion is to clarify why filiality was so important in the Chinese philosophy, wha t was asser ted by discussing filiality and wha t fea tures of Chinese culture were reflected in discussions of filiality. If filiality was not only familial e thics , wha t did it really r ep resen t? There have been many earlier discussions of filiality, because of its importance, and some scholars have paid a t ten t ion to its rel igious quality. For ins tance , Nobuyuki Kaji s t a t e s t h a t filiality was based on Chinese view of life; religious ideas about life and dea th in 1 ancient China, which were principally expressed in ancestor worship, were systematized into filiality by the Confucian school, and the whole of Confucian thought was developed on this basis (Kaji 1990). Jitsuzo Kuwabara says that "filiality and ancestral rites share the same spirit" in his work about Chinese filiality (Kuwabara, p. 13). Their discussions are acceptable, because continuity between filiality and ancestor worship is clearly expressed in the Confucian canons. For example, the "Jiyi H H (the Meaning of Rites)" chapter of the Book of Rites says; A superior man, while (his parents) are alive, reverently serves them; and, when they are dead, he reverently sacrifices to them; his (chief) thought is how for his whole life not to disgrace them. (Legge 1885, vol.2, p.211) m?, tkumm.  ytmwi^  &*£###•&. (LJZS voi.47, P.364) The "Jitong !£&& (the Basis of Rites)" chapter of the same book says; Therefore, in three ways is a filial son's service of his parents shown: when they are alive, by nourishing them. When they are dead, by all the rites of mourning; and when the mourning is over by sacrificing to them. In his nourishing them we see his obedience; in his funeral rites we see his sorrow; in his sacrifices we see his reverence and observance of the (proper) seasons. In these three ways we see the practice of a filial son (Legge vol.2, p.237). m, #mm&&&*  mmm^mmm^ 0 tt~m%>  #^£ff-tn0 (LJZS vol.49, p.375) In these examples is shown that filial duty includes both a child's filial piety toward his living parents and ancestor worship to his ancestor. These ideas can be found in various Confucian books of the Zhanguo to Han periods [ l ] . As will be discussed in the next chapter, xiao meant ancestral rites in the Western Zhou period. Since the idea of 2 filiality developed on the basis of ancestor worship, it is reasonable to assume that the philosophy of filiality reflected the ideology expressed in this religious phenomenon. This feature of filiality is related to the second purpose of this dissertation. Ancestor worship is found in various cultures in the world, though it is not universal, and it is particularly important in East Asia. Various interpretations of it have been presented, but we do not necessarily have a completely satisfactory theory for it. For example, it has not been explained well enough why ancestor worship functions in societies whose social structures differ. In China, ancestor worship has existed since ancient times, and has survived social changes. If the idea of filiality was the philosophical develop-ment of ancestor worship, it is possible to think that filiality was related in some way to the functioning of ancestor worship in different types of social structures. The study of filiality can thus provide suggestions about the essential mechanism of ancestor worship. Because of the relation between filiality and ancestor worship, it is necessary at first to consider how the latter has been understood, so earlier interpretations are here discussed. The anthropological theories of ancestor worship The term "ancestor worship" is adopted in this dissertation, but there can be doubts about this terminology, because it may suggest that the system of beliefs concerning "ancestors" does not deserve the name of "religion". Thus, Hammond-Tooke has proposed that the term "ancestor religion" should be used (1981 p.22). Though his discussion is acceptable, it is not advantageous to spend many pages on the discussion of terminology. My adoption of this traditional term is not based on any preconceptions. Ancestor worship can be defined, in brief, as the belief in deceased kinsmen's (principally ascendants') power over their 3 descendants and the system of ideas and rites based on this belief. Studies of ancestor worship, most of which have been made by anthropologists, are well summarized by Jack Goody (1962, p. 14-25) and by Helen Hardacre (ER. p.263-8). What should be discussed here is some theories presented by anthropologists who studied African tribes based on the principle of unilineal descent. In these tribes, membership in a kinship group is determined by one's unilineal [i.e. patrilineal or matrilineal) relation to his ancestors. That is, a patrilineal (or matrilineal) descent group exclusively consists of agnatic [or uterine) descendants of its founding ancestor. This kind of descent group, which is called "lineage", is usually segmented into smaller descent groups which are in turn segmented. The system of segmentation is the inevit-able result of the principle of unilineal descent. For example, suppose that there is a localized patri-lineage group. All of its members are the agnatic descendants of the founding ancestor. When the number of the members increases, it becomes difficult for it to remain a single group, and descendants of sons (or grandsons) of the founding ancestor respectively form different groups, though they maintain a loose bond. A few generations later, each group splits again, with unity as a whole maintained. Thus, on any level, a descent group is defined by reference to an ancestor, and a whole picture of society looks like a pyramid organization of descent groups. Another feature of the unilineal descent group lies in that it is necessarily a corporate group; though it splits, it never ceases to exist when its head dies (if its members do not die out). Different from kindred, a descent group and its headship are jurally sanctioned by society. The Tallensi in Ghana, a typical example of such patrilineal descent society, are studied by Meyer Fortes (1969). Fortes understands ancestor worship among the Tallensi on the basis of lineage structure. According to him, the nuclear element of patrilineal descent lies in a 4 father-son relationship. Among the Tallensi, he says, "a  father of a family has two distinct elements of status" (1961 p. 174); on the one hand, he is a father because of the biological fact that he has begotten his son. On the other hand, fatherhood means "head of the lineage seg-ment" (p.175), to which jural autonomy and authority are attached. Thus, fatherhood is nothing but lineage headship, which is not only the heart of the lineage system but also the very heart of society, because the whole Tale society is based on the lineage system. Next, Fortes discusses that from this feature of fatherhood arises "the tension in the relationship between father and son" [p. 170). They are affectionate to each other in everyday life, but a son cannot have autonomy until his father's death. Therefore, as Fortes puts it, "there is an antithesis between the inescapable bonds of dependence, for sustenance, for pro-tection from danger and death, in status and personal development, of sons upon their fathers, on the one hand, and the inherent oppositions of successive generations, on the other hand" (p. 197). The underlying competition between fathers and sons ends in the father's death, so it seems to be sons' victory. However, the Tallensi cannot accept this fact, because fatherhood which is the heart of the social structure should not be defeated by sonship. Furthermore, because fatherhood symbolizes the status of a corporate group, it should not die. Here the ancestor appears. A father as an individual dies, but his status is re-established as an ancestor after funeral rites. In this sense, "ancestorhood is fatherhood made immortal" (p. 189); ancestor is the image of fatherhood projected into the spiritual domain. This basic structure characterizes the function of ancestor worship. Though ancestors are generally recognized to be benevolent, they afflict descendants with misfortune or disease to ask for offer-ings. The hostility of ancestors is caused by the fact that they symbolize authority of lineage headship. Just as a lineage head enforces 5 discipline in the lineage and as he can punish those who violate order, ancestors require descendants to preserve the order of the lineage. Furthermore, since lineage headship is the heart of the whole society, ancestors symbolize the authority of the whole society, and submission to them is nothing but loyalty to the society and its value system. Fortes also discusses the psychological function of ancestor wor-ship in Tale society. The Tale people think as much of "pietas" (i.e. filial piety) as the Chinese do. Fortes defines it as "complex of reverent regard, moral norms, ritual observance and material duty in the relationship between parent and child, more particularly of son to father, both during the lifetime and after the death of the parents" (p. 182). Because ancestors are the projected image of fatherhood, the essence of ancestor worship is "pietas" toward ancestors, and a son can-not escape the duty of "pietas" even after the death of his parents. When he acquires the status of a lineage head at his father's death, "pietas" helps him not to feel that he owes his achievement to the death, because the death is believed to be caused by ancestors, who are "the fountainhead of authority and the final sanction of pietas" (p. 193). In addition, the cause of personal misfortune or disability is attributed to ancestors; "the Tallensi can accept responsibility on the personal level for the good and ill in their lives without feeling morbidly guilty or having guilt fixed on them by jural and religious sanctions" (1959 p.30); they content themselves with performing their duty of "pietas". While Fortes' theory puts stress on succession, Jack Goody pays attention to inheritance, in his studies of ancestor worship in the Lo Dagaa. This tribe is divided into the Lo Wiili and the Lo Dagaba. In the former all property is inherited in the agnatic line, and a patrilineal descent group seems to be crucial. The latter transmit immovable proper-ty in this way, but movable wealth is inherited in the uterine line. This suggests that the Lo Dagaba have double unilineal descent system (1962 p.8). Goody admits that there is tension between a father and his son in the Lo Wiili, as in the Tallensi; a father "has the power of life and death over his agnatic descendants while he is still alive", and after his death this power "is buttressed by his position as custodian of the ancestral shrine." Therefore, "the ancestors are them-selves standardized projections of the father's role" (p.408). The situation is different in the Lo Dagaba; authority is vested in two different roles, and tensions exist between a holder of movable property [i.e. mother's brother) and his heir (sister's son). Thus, "the power of the mother's ancestors arises from the authority held by the mother's brother during his lifetime" (p.409). From these facts, Goody concludes: "The heirs gain control of these goods (i.e. money and livestock) only at the death of the holder, an event that is therefore hoped for as well as feared; when it comes, the death arouses joy as well as sadness, the inheritance brings guilts as well as pleasure. In the main, it is those from whose death one benefits that one fears as ancestors" (p.410). Though Goody's theory is different from Fortes' in the point of his emphasis on guilt, both theories share the idea that ancestor is the projection of fatherhood that symbolizes authority of lineage headship. John Middleton discusses ancestor worship as a kind of political system for a lineage head's exerting his power over its members. In the Lugbara of the Congo, senior members of a lineage have the right to supervise "ghost invocation" when a descendant suffers from sickness. (A senior can invoke ancestors to punish his disobedient son.) A supervisor of this ritual tries to identify which ancestor afflicts the sufferer, and interprets, for instance, that the sufferer's disobedience toward his seniors causes an anger of an ancestor. Through this ritual, seniors express their authority as heads of lineages or segments. Middleton's detailed description reveals a process of struggle between a lineage •7 head, who tries to maintain his lineage, and a collateral segment head, who wants independence for his segment (1960). These theories help us understand the general features of ancestor worship, but they lead to other problems. These theories recognize ancestor worship on the basis of lineage structure, but ancestor worship exists in societies which are not based on lineage structure. In this case, where can we seek for the essence of ancestor worship? In China, for example, lineage groups have not had crucial importance in society since the Han period, even though they existed (and exist) in some areas. But ancestor worship has been an important religious phenomenon throughout the Chinese history. How could ancestor worship survive after the decline of lineage groups in the Zhanguo period? Is it consistent to say that ancestor worship stands on lineage structure and yet it can work where a whole society is not based on unilineal descent? Scholars who have studied ancestor worship in modern China, there-fore, seem to be skeptical about the theories presented by Africanists. Maurice Freedman discusses that there are two types [or elements) of ancestor worship. One is ancestor worship in ancestor halls; this aspect is related to a whole lineage or its segments. Male agnates of a lineage collectively offer sacrifices to their ancestors in ancestral halls to dramatize their prestige and solidarity. The other type is "domestic" ancestor worship which is centered on a household shrine. In this type, offerings are made principally by female members of a few related house-holds, and the main purpose is to commemorate ancestors. Freedman calls the latter aspect "memorialism", and thinks that this aspect is universal and obligatory, while ancestor worship in ancestral halls, which only the rich people can afford, is voluntary. He also attributes benevolence of Chinese ancestors to the commemorative feature of "memorialism" [1958, 1967 and 1979). Michio Suenari's monograph shows that ancestor worship in ancestor halls is a kind of economic activity; S members of a lineage save up money for ancestral rites, and the gathered money is invested to various activities (1977, 78). Emily Ahern presents a socialization hypothesis to explain the relative malevolence of ancestors in the Ch'i-nan village of Northern Taiwan; she accepts Goody's inheritance hypothesis, because it explains why ancestor worship exists in China, but she thinks that this hypothesis breaks down in one important respect. That is, making an analysis of a folktale, she finds that the villagers feel no guilt over what they receive from the dead. Thus, she suggests, the image of ancestors reflects the attitude of parents toward children, and stern treatment of children is related to aggressiveness of ancestors CI973 p. 191-219). In their discussion of Korean ancestor worship, Roger Janelli and Dawnhee Janelli contradict the theories of Fortes and Goody; because a father's wealth is dis-tributed among his sons while he is still alive in Korea, sons do not have to feel guilt at a father's death. The Janellis also adopt the socialization hypothesis to explain the benevolent image of ancestors in East Asia CI982 p. 167-76 and p. 188-95). These discussions can be accepted; in fact, the discussion that the image of ancestors reproduces children's perceptions of parents CJanelli p. 173) accords with Fortes' idea that ancestors are the projection of fatherhood. Ancestors symbolize authority of lineage headship in the patrilineal descent system, as Fortes clarifies, and it may be possible to say that East Asian ancestors symbolize the authority of parenthood which is experienced in infancy. But, if this view is accepted, we have another problem. The authority of parenthood is universal; in any society, parents must have, more or less, authority over their children; otherwise, child-nurturing would be impossible. On the other hand, ancestor worship is not a universal phenomenon; it is prominent in some societies, but not in other societies. Why is the authority of parent-hood deified as ancestors in particular societies? What causes ancestor 9 worship to function, if the theories of Fortes and Goody are not acceptable? To solve the problem discussed above, ancestor worship in ancient China is an interesting subject of research, because ancestor worship, which functioned in the lineage society of the Western Zhou period, continued to exist after the decline of lineage groups in the Chunqiu and Zhanguo periods. This point is probably a striking contrast to the situation of ancient Europe. In the republican era of ancient Rome (c. 509-27 B.C.E.), for instance, the noble class was based on a property-holding unit, the "family (familia)", which originated from the archaic "clan (gens)" system (Heitland 1909, p.35). A family head (pater-familias) had absolute power over the rest of his family, as far as formal descriptions are concerned (Rawson 1986, p. 16), and the duty of obedience to his authority (patria potestas), that is pietas, was not only emphasized symbolically in domestic cults (Dixon 1992, p. 136), but also promoted by government as loyalty to deities and the Roman state [2] . The situation of ancient Rome seems to have been quite similar to that of ancient China, especially in the point that paternal authority also represented governmental authority, but in Europe patriarch and ancestor lost their universal validity when the concept of supreme God was introduced, as Robert Bellah has discussed (1970). Bellah has pointed out that fatherhood continued to be supreme in China, while paternal authority was sanctioned only under the name of God in Europe, but he does not clarify why parental authority and ancestor worship could survive in China. By finding out the reasons for their survival, we can probably understand the basic structure of ancestor worship that can function in different social structures. There must have been many reasons for this survival; for example, though lineage groups became less important in the Zhanguo period, compared l O with earlier periods, but it is certain that lineage continued to exist, more or less, in imperial periods [3] . This can partially explain the continuous existence of ancestor worship in China. But, as Tu Wei-ming [1985) has argued about the Confucian ideas of selfhood which placed crucial importance on a father-son relationship, it is possible to assume that philosophy played some role for the survival of paternal authority. What will be discussed in this dissertation is the philosophical aspect which may have been related to the survival of ancestor worship. This is also the reason why the philosophy of filiality in the Zhanguo period, not in other periods, is dealt with here; one of our purposes is to clarify, from the philosophical point of view, the adaptation of ancestor worship to a non-lineage society. When we think about filial piety in ancient China, there is one book we cannot ignore, the Xiaojing or the Book of Filiality. This book, bringing together the earlier ideas of filiality, became a basic scripture of Confucian tradition, and had a powerful influence on Chinese culture. It not only reflects the social context in which it was produced but also suggests much about the essence of filiality. For this reason, the history of the philosophy of filiality will be described in this dissertation as the process perfected by the composition of this book. Though this may not be the most desirable way of carrying out our discussion, it is perhaps the best method we can use in the present situation. Thus, we will examine in Chapter One the emergence of the word "xiao # " in the patrilineal descent society of the Western Zhou and Chunqiu periods. Then, several Zhanguo attempts to re-define the concept will be discussed in Chapter Two. Because the ideas of filiality were most developed in the Book of Filiality, the book will be dealt with in Chapter Three to understand what was essentially achieved in the philosophy of filiality. In Chapter Four we will study some related documents, which are supposed to have been written by Confucians, 1 1 contr ibut ing most to the development of this philosophy. Because it is not known when these documents were wri t ten, we need to re -cons t ruc t t h e processes of their composition by comparing their ideas to each other. Finally, backgrounds of th is philosophy will be discussed. 1 2 CHAPTER ONE FILIALITY AND ANCESTOR WORSHIP IN THE WESTERN ZHOU AND CHUNQIU PERIODS In this chapter, we will discuss filiality (xiao # ) in the Western Zhou (the late 11th century to 770 B.C.E.) and Chunqiu (770-476 B.C.E.) periods. Western Zhou society was based on a unilineal principle, as far as the ruling class was concerned, and its structure is supposed to have been similar to the African societies we referred to above. Anthro-pological theories about filiality and ancestor worship are applicable to this situation; ancestor worship was the religious phenomenon in which the headship of patrilineal descent groups (zongzu 7j?j£c) was deified as ancestor, and filiality was the ethical expression of ancestor worship. Filiality in the Western Zhou period was the basis on which the philosophy of filiality was developed. [1) Filiality in the Western Zhou bronze inscriptions The graph xiao # consists two elements: the element of "an old man" C 6^) and that of "a child" ("?)• In some bronze inscriptions, this graph takes the form of an old man leaning on a child [See Figure I). The Shuowen Jiezi s&JCJ^'^  explains the word xiao as "those who serve their parents well. It follows an abbreviated lao 3t  and a zi f . A child serves the old. WWXM^,  M.=£#, M ? \ ?&%&o  " (Shuowen vol.8a, p.402). There are the graph kao ^j and that of lao 3£  which include the same element "an old man". Judged from its form, the graph lao ^ is a variation of its bone graph form " fj "  (an old man leaning on a stick), and the word lao means "senior". The graph kao ^ consists of the "old man" element and the phonetic element " *s". The word kao ^ means "father" and father had the connotation of "the senior" in ancient 1 3 14-01 ' I 3, it Si rt X * a * f) -a £ I -St * I •THD" « • ..Si. JS-/ < • ••4fc fv 4 * £ * * fit- * FIGURE ONE: The Graph Xiao in the Bronze Inscription (J inwenbian &£%&,  vol.8, p.600) 1 4 China, as will be discussed later. This suggests that filiality was a concept concerned with a relationship between fatherhood/seniority and sonship. The shape of graphs Meaning ^s lao (*16g) An old man leaning on a stick. The senior. % kao (*k'6g) An "old man" element and an phonetic element. Father. # xiao (*xog) An "old man" element and a "child" element. Filiality. We will proceed with our discussion by following dictionary definitions of the word lao ^ as an old man, the word Kao % as father and the word xiao ^ as the behavior toward them. In oracle bone inscriptions, no example of the word xiao # can be found. There is one example of this graph, according to the Jiagu Wenbian EP#3£lB (P-357), but the graph it cites ( ^ ) cannot be transcribed as "xiao" [1] . This fact, however, does not necessarily mean that the word "xiao" did not exist in the Shang period (the 14th? to 11th centuries B.C.), because we find this graph in the "Xiao-you ^1=3" belonging to the period of the Later Shang or Early Zhou (Sandai vol.13, p.34) as the name of a person [2] . In addition, ancestor worship was an important religious activity in the Shang dynasty, and many scholars agree that the social structure of Shang was based on lineage, though there are various opinions about the actual formation of lineage groups and their relation to the dynasty (Matsumaru 1970, 1985; ltd 1975; Lin Yun 1979; Wang Guimin 1989; Zhu Fenghan 1990). Since filiality in the Western Zhou period was related to lineage and was expressed in ancestor worship, as we will discuss in this chapter, the concept of filiality, or a concept similar to filiality, may have existed in the Shang period, though the word "xiao" was not used in bone inscriptions. It is in the middle period of Western Zhou that this word was used I S in bronze inscriptions to convey the concept of filiality. This has been well studied by Li Yumin (1974) and Wang Shenxing (1992), and there is not much to add to their discussions here. What is problematic, however, is Li's emphasis on the sudden decline of the ideology of filiality in the Chunqiu period. This is because Li attributes to the Western Zhou period many bronze inscriptions that really belonged to the Chunqiu period. Indeed, many of the existing examples of the word xiao # date back to the late period of Western Zhou, but this is because the usage of the word "xiao" is inevitably connected with the portion of the bronze inscription which Shaughnessy calls "the dedication" (1991 p.83) [3] . This is a concluding portion of an inscription that notes the intentions of those who produced vessels, especially concerning the usage of the vessels, the sacrifices to ancestors or the hope for longevity. In the bronze inscriptions of the early Western Zhou period, this portion is not so long. It is longer and more formulaic in inscrip-tions of the middle Western Zhou period, and is still more in the late period, as Minao Hayashi has discussed (1983 p.21-29). "The dedication" in the early Chunqiu inscriptions is also long and formulaic. Typically, the sentences including the word xiao in the bronze inscriptions of the Western Zhou period describe: first, the production of a vessel, then the usage of the vessel (mainly ancestral rites), next the wishes of the producer (= the person who was described to have the verse cast) such as longevity or happiness, and finally the hope that the vessel will be used by his descendants. In the case of the "Wei Luan-ding $k1(sfcM",  for instance, we read as follows; In the ninth month of the twenty-third year of the king when the king was in Zongzhou, the king ordered Wei Luan to superintend L4] and administer Nine Banks. (Therefore [5] ,) Luan (= I) produce a precious ritual boiling-ding-vessel of [61 my august father. By using it, Luan will make offerings and offer filiality to my father, so 1 6 that he may give me prosperous happiness m , generous beneficence, genuine aid, longevity, an eternal mandate and an auspicious ending. May (I have) ten thousand years and no limit! The sons and descendants of Luan shall use this as a treasure to make offerings. (Ref.I-17) m^^MM^, m&mWi&fo.  &£mm,  *^mm, #n*zmm*  m=?» aS?fc*/fl^. CJianmu 1176) This example shows that the word xiao # is typically mentioned in a bronze inscription when it describes the usage of the bronze vessel. Because bronze vessels in the Western Zhou were mainly used for ancestral rites, this word is thought to have been related to ancestral rites, or to have represented the sacrifices to ancestor, as will be discussed later. The bronze inscriptions of the early and middle Zhou periods tend to have fewer such statements because the dedicatory portion is not yet developed fully. The usage of xiao ^ or filiality in the bronze inscriptions is shown in Reference I of Appendix One. In the eight examples involving the word "xiao" which belong to the middle Western Zhou period, two of them do not note the intentions of those who produced them (Example 3 and 8 in Reference I. The number of an example will be abbreviated to, for example, 1-3. In the case of Example 1 in Reference II, it will be abbreviated to II-1). In two of them (1-1 and 1-2), the meaning of the word xiao is not related to the usage of the bronze vessels. The word xiao is used in more than forty inscriptions belonging to the late Western Zhou period. Most of the inscriptions not only follow the pattern of the typical statement discussed above, but also describe at full length the wishes of those who had them inscribed. We can see in Reference I the process in which, the more fully the "dedication" developed, the more often the word xiao became used [8] . IT This word is used as a noun in the "Da Ke-ding" (1-9), and we can suppose that the phrase "manifest filiality" indicates a kind of ritual behavior. The word is used as an adjective in the "Qiang-pan" (1-1), and here it bears an ethical meaning because it is used to praise the virtue of Shi (Jiang. It is also shown by other examples that xiao was an important moral code; the inscription of the "Ying-gui" (1-2) suggests that offering filiality was required so as for one not to "lose (the Mandate)". In the "Li-ding" (I-10), filiality and friendliness are described as the pattern to be followed. In the Kanggao MlSi  chapter of the Book of Documents is stated "the unfilial and the unbrotherly" are "the primary evil doers" (Karlgren 1950, p.42) [9] . In most of the examples, however, the word is used as an intransi-tive verb, and it means, not an abstract virtue, but concrete ancestral rites, as Li Yumin has clearly shown (1974 p.20). The word is typically used in such phrases as "make offerings and offer filiality (to ancestors) ffi^^# or 5f£#", "filially worship and filially sacrifice # f fE#^" , "mindful of the past, offer filiality j l i # " and "have a feast and offer filiality ijf^". A variant of the graph xiao ( ^ ) will best show that the concept of filiality is related to giving feasts to ancestors1 1 0 1 . What we mean by ancestral rites here is a sequence of ritual behavior, including purification (gi ^ ) , addressing and invo-cations (zhu 3K) to ancestors, offering wine and food (xian Jj|t), blessings ("felicity" or gu 8x) of ancestors which are symbolized by those of an impersonator, and banquets for attendants. We can learn this ritual process from the Tesheng Kuishi # t t l t ^ chapter and the Shaolao Kuishi 4>2£H:fe chapter of the Yili £gj|} (YLZS vol.44-50, Steele 1917), and it is clear that wine and food have the principal importance in the rites; for instance, the blessings of ancestors are not only verbally expressed, but symbolized by an impersonator's presenting a wine-cup in response to wine offered by a host of rites. The concept of filiality 1 8 was so closely related to the concept of offering that the former indicated to make offerings for ancestors in ritual contexts. But this does not necessarily mean that filiality equals rites or offerings. Because the word xiao ^ functions as an adverb in the phrase "filially sacrifice # | j l" , we can assume that it represents some highly valued normative behavior or mentality in ancestral rites. Another common phrase, "mindful of the past, offer filiality j | | ^ " suggests that filiality was principally for the living, and was something to be extended to the dead; the concept of zhui j | | was related to dead prede-cessors, and the word zhui was coupled with the word xiao when it was necessary to clarify that filiality was offered to ancestors. Filiality or "xiao" in this period had a wider connotation than it had in later periods. The object of filiality was not only parents and ancestors but also "brothers .521=}" [1-52), "friends M^L"  (1-15, 1-22 and 1-27), "matrimonial relatives #{f$§" CI-15 and 1-52) and "the senior of a lineage ^ ^ " CI-52 and 1-45). Besides, there are many examples which state "to offer filiality" in "the ancestral room [or, the room of a lineage) ^ ^ " (1-26, 1-37, 1-38, 1-40, 1-47 and 1-57), "the big ancestral shrine Cor, the main lineage) ;^TJ?" CI-48), "the big room Jz js?" (1-39) and "an ancestral shrine ^ ? 0 " (1-15). The meanings of these words will be discussed later, but at least we can say that filiality was not only an ethic for the parent-child relationship. As Li Yumin and Wang Shenxing have pointed out (Li p.23 and Wang p.273), filiality was an ideology that supported lineage; it was a doctrine requiring people to obey the authority of the lineage, which was represented by the authority of parents. Thus, the objects of filiality were extended to include the whole lineage structure, and its ethical requirements included respect towards elders with their degree of seniority, friend-ship among kinsfolk, and harmony between in-laws. Nevertheless, Li goes too far when he says that filiality included 1 9 loyalty to the Zhou kings (p.20). It is true that filiality and loyalty had a close relationship to each other in the Western Zhou society, but Li's explanations do not prove that the dynastic government was the object of filiality. He cites two examples to support his argument; One is the "Ying-gui x . EJC"> which he apparently reads, "The Supreme Emperor did not finish the Mandate. (Ying will,) mindful of the past, offer filiality to Great Zhou. ± i t * £ | | ^ \ =f WMjli#0 " But, compared with a phrase in the "Xiao Ke-ding (Small Ke-ding) /hjSjfU", "the king ordered Shanfu Ke to promulgate the mandate in Chengzhou zE^t#C= H^JnLla TJ^P J5J£/c§", one would have to read the "Ying-gui" as, "The Supreme Emperor did not finish the Mandate in Great Zhou. (Ying will,) mindful of the past, offer filiality (to his ancestor). ± ^ * S ^ ^ ^ ^ T J ^ , j ! # „ " (See Ref.I-2). The other example that he cites is from the "Mai-zun 3? W- He reads the passage as "(Mai) manifests his filiality toward (Marquis) Xing -»§ (=11)^5 (=#)^P#(=7fft)." Because Mai was a retainer of Marquis Xing, this passage would show that Mai was "filial" to his lord if Li's reading were right. But this inscription has the word kao 5^ ("father"), not xiao # . The word Kao f^" sometimes represents filiality (xiao ^ ) in the bronze inscriptions, as an example in the "Xing Ren-ning-zhong" (1-19) shows, but the context of this inscription shows that the subject of this passage is not Mai but Marquis Xing, as Michio Matsumaru has discussed (1980 p . l 64 ) [ 1 1 ] . This passage should be read as "(Marquis) respectfully and properly settled Marquis' bright father('s spirit) in Xing, JB 1 | k = i 0 » ^ | i (=ffi)#^#(=ffR)". Because neither example supports Li's theory, the object of filiality in the Western Zhou period is not thought to have included the monarch-retainer relation. If the word xiao in the Western Zhou bronze inscriptions re-presented concretely ancestral rites, and its scope was wider than in later periods, how should we position the idea of filiality within S O Western Zhou social structure and governmental organization? In order to solve this problem, we have to take a general view of Western Zhou society, which, especially for the noble class, consisted of groups called "zongzu 'MJM"-  These groups were patrilineal kinship groups, whose membership was defined by patri-filiation. Residence was viri-local. The inheritance of property was from father to sons, with unigenitary [almost primogenitary) succession to office. These groups were also corporate entities, the existence of which was symbolized by the ancestral shrines. In fact, these groups were quite similar to the African type of patrilineal descent groups, that is lineage, which was discussed in the introduction of this dissertation. The similarity be-tween the zongzu group and the lineage group can be also found in their way of segmentation; in the unilineal descent system, all lineages are hierarchically organized between the minimal level and the maximum level of lineages. The smallest lineages are segments of a more inclusive lineage defined by reference to a common ancestor, and this, in turn, is a segment of a still wider lineage defined by reference to a common ancestor [Fortes 1969, p.31). Likewise, when a zongzu group split into minor segments, minor segments sharing common ancestors continued to compose a corporate group. For instance, the Shuzhong M(W  family of the Lu state in the Chunqiu period was a segment of a more inclusive group, the Shusun $ ( ^ family, and the Shusun family was a segment of a still more inclusive group, San Huan H g group (three families descended from Duke Huan). This group was also a segment of still a more inclusive group, that of Duke of Lu; and so on, until the limit was reached — the exogamous maximal lineage whose members shared the same surname. There is no problem in calling the zongzu group as "lineage". The similarity of social structure between Ancient China and Africa enables us to adopt the theory that anthropologists use to explain the African type of ancestor worship. The essential human relationship of 2 1 patrilineal descent groups lay in patri-filiation, that was a father-son relationship, and fatherhood was nothing else but the authority of the group. Obedience to fatherhood was not only obedience to the authority of the group but also obedience to the social order, because the whole society was based on the principle of patrilineal descent. Filiality, as the ethic for the father-son relationship, was easily extended beyond a domestic group. One piece of supporting evidence is found in the way the word "fu St (father)" was used. The explanation of the graph fu St  found in the Shuowen Jiezi M^CM^>  that is the figure of a father brandishing a stick to beat his children (p. 116), seems to be derived from only the shape of the graph " ^ ", but might be partially accurate. Guo Moruo $$ ^ ^ r thinks that fu ^ or an ax is the original meaning of the word fu, that is, he thinks the graph fu St  represents an ax held by a hand (Jinwen Changyong Zidian p.316). Luo Zhenyu JStJiiEE asserts that what the hand holds in the graph fu St  is fire (1914 vol.2, p.22). Gao Hongjin M 3$#jf says that the line held in the "hand" is nothing but an abstract object, and the word originally means "to hold" or ba #E. It would be quite interesting to know whether what is abstractly symbolized by the line is power or authority, because Gao thinks that vertical line in the graph yin ^ ( ^ ) , which he thinks has the same pattern as the graph fu St, symbolizes assignment (shi 3f). (Gao Hongjin vol.3, p. 13) However, a clearer picture of the original meaning of the word fu is unnecessary here. What we should make sure of is the following; the word fu St  not only meant "father" (including uncles in the sense of classificatory kinship terminology) but also became the honorific title by which the king referred to lords of the same clan, and the honorific title of every nobleman. The latter fact can be seen from how noblemen are referred to "(so and so) fu". As proof for the former fact, one can cite the passages, "Oh, Father and Peacemaker 5£ii?tJ", in the "Wenhou 2 2 Zhi Ming JC@c£.1*ii"  chapter of the Book of Documents [an address of Zhou King to Marquis Wen of Jin. SSTJ p.24, SSZS vol.20, p. 141, Karlgren p.78) and "Since I have a fat lamb, I will urgently invite many fathers of mine KWJIE ff. ^ J S H ^ " in the ode "Famu flc?fc" (No.165) of the Book of Odes (MS-HY p.35, Karlgren p.223). Zheng Xuan M%  (127-200 C.E.) adds to the latter a comment which says, "When the Son of Heaven addresses lords of the same surname and when a lord addresses nobles of the same surname, (the addressers) call (the addressees) 'fathers'. ^-J 1 mmmmm, $&&mm&tt*  WRX"  (MSZS vol.9-3, p.l43). On the other hand, the fact that the word fu sometimes means "the old" (the passage "father wearing coarse clothes $5;2l5£" in the section on the thirteen year of Duke Ai in the Zuozhuan: CQ-HY p.486, and such compound words as fuxiong 3£5E and fulao 5£.3£)  suggests that fatherhood and seniority were synonymous in the lineage structure of the Zhou period [ 1 2 J . From the facts that "father" represented both high status and seniority, we can conclude that the "father" represented the leadership of a lineage and symbolizes the authority of the group. Xhy? -^ o r filiality expressed submission to this authority, and its contents included submission to social structures constructed on patrilineal descent. The ancestor was nothing but the projection of fatherhood or authority, and ancestral rites were the best opportunity for loyalty to authority to be dramatized. This is the reason that xiao # or filiality most often appears in the bronze inscriptions with the meaning of "ancestral rites". Though filiality did not include loyalty in the Western Zhou period, there was a close relationship between them. In fact, the promotion of ancestor worship had the function of strengthening govern-mental power through the king's interference in his retainers' ancestral rites. The king could appeal to his retainers' loyalty by stressing their ancestors' loyal devotion and the ethic of filiality, which would 2 3 thus call on them to follow their ancestors' examples. Bronze inscriptions in the Western Zhou period were political documents, which recorded the "favor" of a monarch and the loyalty of his retainer. For example, the "Ke-zun ^  W  says; The King said to the small child (= Ke) of the lineage in the Great Room, "In former times, in the days of (Ke?, your] father, Che) could follow King Wen well, and therefore King Wen was given the Great Mandate (of Heaven). Oh! Though you were too young (at that time) to know (your father's merits), you should follow your father, perform (merits?) (recognized by) Heaven [ 1 3 ] , and carry out the mandates (of the King) respectfully." Ke was awarded thirty sets of shells, and therefore makes a precious vessel of (?)gong (= Ke's father). ffl&JUfUro, JBD&SMM*. (Jianmu 4461) The Son of Heaven mentioned Ke's father, who had been a loyal retainer, and wanted Ke to be also a loyal retainer, when the Son of Heaven awarded Ke the gifts. Responding to the favor of the Son of Heaven, Ke made the vessel of his father and left the statement of the Son of Heaven on record. In this context, Ke's filiality to his father was inevitably shifted to his loyalty to the King. This inscription pretends to have been written by Ke, but this kind of inscription was actually written by the royal government, as Michio Matsumaru has discussed. By writing the sentences recorded in the bronze vessel of his retainer, the Son of Heaven asserted his superiority, and forced the retainer to use the vessel in the retainer's ancestral rites, to demonstrate the monarch-retainer relation in the ancestral rites (Matsumaru 1980, p. 122-126). The Zhou dynasty tried to enhance the ethic of filiality, because filiality promoted obedience to governmental power, as shown by the 2 4 "Jiugao ?@i§" chapter of the Book of Documents, which says, They (= the subjects of Duke Jin) should make whole-hearted their cultivation of the millet and hasten to serve their seniors and superiors. They should diligently lead their carts and oxen and far away manage the trading of commodities, and [thus) filially nourish their parents. Their parents will be happy [Karlgren 1950, p.43) m±Mm&mm&mmm. ^^mmmmms  mmw*  M M , m^mmz na mxmmo  csszs voi.i4, P.94) It is asserted here that submission to governmental authority brings security, which brings pleasure to parents. Since the spirit of filial-ity is submission to authority, it guarantees loyalty to King as long as government is based on and in accordance with lineage structure. Here political loyalty accords with filiality; so Li Yumin is right in this sense when he says that filiality involves loyalty. (2) Filiality in the Chunqiu period It is thought that the lineage structure discussed above gradually weakened in the Chunqiu period. Because bronze inscriptions lost the function of supporting the loyal government, the necessity to emphasize filiality for political purposes was reduced. Instead, the self-admiration of those who produced vessels (such as their pride in genealogy) became more prominent elements within Chunqiu inscriptions. However, the usage of the word xiao in Chunqiu inscriptions is not diflferent from that in Western Zhou inscriptions. The word is used in all the examples in Reference I (61-88) as an intransitive verb, which means to "offer filiality". This suggests that filiality indicated ancestral rites in the Chunqiu period, just as in the Western Zhou period. Li Yumin has pointed out that the usage of the word drastically decreased in the Chunqiu period, and he attributes this to the social changes 2 5 Cp.25). Indeed the frequency in use of the word decreased, as the number of the examples in Reference I shows, but the change seems not to have been as drastic as Li describes. Certainly, there were some changes in the situation in which the word xiao was used. For instance, we can point out that inscriptions involving the word became more stereotyped. In fact, the word is used in three formulae which are best exemplified respectively by the following three examples; Shao ShuShanfu (= I), Great Minister of Manufacture of Count Zheng, produce (this) set fu-vessel. Using the vessel, I will make offerings and offer filiality to pray for longevity. May my sons and grandsons eternally make it as a treasure. (Shao Shushanfu-fu, See Ref.I-68) j*te*wiH#iii£fftifcs, m^m&*  mfymm.  =?*m*,  m%,*m* Wuren (= I), Duke of Shang Ruo, produce (this) ritual gui-vessel. Using it, I will make offerings and offer filiality to my august grandfather and my august father, so as (for them) to give (me) longevity amounting ten thousand years and no limit (i.e. a limit-less life of a myriad years). (Ruogong Wuren-gui, Ref.I-63) Jian (= I), Duke of Ruo, produce the set fu-vessel. Using it, I will, mindful of the past, offer filiality to (my) august grand-father and august father, so as (for them) to give longevity. May my sons and grandsons eternally use this vessel as a treasure. (Ruogong Jian-fu, Ref.I-65) As far as bronze inscriptions are concerned, it is possible to think that the concept of filiality was too closely connected with ancestral rites to be used in a wider context. It is not necessarily certain that the word xiao was used always in 2 6 the way described above, because among the texts written in the Chunqiu period we find a few examples in which the word bears an ethical meaning, as follows; "Who is there present? Zhangzhong, the filial and friendly ^cni-fi:^l> ! ! # # £ " , (The ode Liuyue 7 \ ^ , No.177; Karlgren 1944 p.228, MS-HY p.39) "You have something to depend on, something to help you; you have filial piety, you have virtue, to lead you on and help you. W$fWlt» ^ # # $ 1 , W3IWX" (The ode Quan^ H|5f, No.252, Karlgren 1945 p.75, MS-HY p.65) "Forever he is filial and thoughtful; filial and thoughtful he is a norm (to others). Lovable is this (= One man) sovereign, responsive is his compliant virtue; forever he is filial and thoughtful (of the ancestor), brightly he continues their task. ^ ( W ^ S > &—A. JSfr^JlB®, * a # S L VBWtMM"  (The ode Xiawu Tfft No.243, Karlgren 1945 p.70, MS-HY p . 6 2 ) U 4 ] . Though the word principally indicates ancestral rites among the Chunqiu texts [ 1 5 ] , as in bronze inscriptions, it would be incorrect to think that the concept of filiality became related merely to ritual behavior. The essential feature of filiality, that is obedience to authority of lineage, did not change. Another point that Li Yumin notes in his discussion of Chunqiu filiality is that the objects of filiality became narrower than in the Western Zhou (p.25). In this point he is correct. Eight inscriptions refer to "making offerings and offering filiality # 3 ^ " to "august grandfather and refined father M t l ^ t # " or "august grandfather and august father M f t M # " (1-62, 63, 64, 65, 71, 77, 83 and 88), two to "august father M # " (1-86 and 61), two to "ancestors jfcffi" (1-76 and 80) and one to "father and mother ;$£©" (1-67). Two other examples refer to ancestors' posthumous names. One of them includes great-grandparents, 2*r grandparents and parents (1-84), while the other has only a grandfather and a father (1-64). Dazong ^C?^ is referred to in only one case (1-81). Neither "friends Hfj^!" nor "brothers H^H" appear. Li Yumin's inter-pretation of this tendency is that the declining power of the Zhou Kings weakened the bond between lineage groups, and that filiality could not work in the wider context beyond a lineal relation such as parents and sons or progenitors and descendants (p.25). That is to say, the Chunqiu period faced the collapse of lineage groups and the growth of families as fundamental socio-economic units; filiality as the ethic of lineages lost its validity within larger society and, being limited to families, came to mean exclusively affection and obedience to parents and ancestors. This interpretation is probably an over-simplification of the situation, because there are some examples which indicate that guests were invited to ancestral rites; "Using the bell, (I) will, mindful of the past, offer filiality to ancestors, and entertain fathers and brothers (=seniors), giving them for drink and food, and playing music and dancing." (1-80) "(Using the bell, a grandson of the Taoshi family) will make offerings and offer filiality to my august grandfather and refined father. (Using it, I) will hold banquets and serve dishes to delight fine guests and our friends." (1-78) "I will make offerings and offer filiality to august grandfather Shengshu, august grandmother Shengjiang, august grandfather Youcheng Huishu, august grandmother Youcheng Huijiang, august father Jizhong august mother, to pray for longevity, no death and to protect my brothers." (1-84) 2 J 8 In these passages "fathers and brothers", "guests and friends" and "brothers" are not the direct objects to which filiality is offered, but appear in contexts related to rituals. Therefore, there is a possibility that the stereotyped phrases prevented them from being the direct objects of filiality and that people actually attended ancestral rites carried out by a related lineage group. Li seems to be basically right, but a more detailed study of such words as "brothers" or "friends" will be necessary for deciding what is meant by the fact that the direct objects of xiao became more limited, that is, whether that fact reflects some changes in the concept of filiality and in the content of ancestral rites. [3) The functions of ancestral rites recognized by the people of the Western Zhou Though the data on the actual procedures of Zhou ancestral rites are too scarce for us to reconstruct them, some information is available about the ideas Zhou people had concerning the function that their ancestral rites served. The "dedication" of bronze inscriptions usually states the purposes of bronze vessels, and though most of them describe that the vessels are used in sacrifices for ancestors, there are exceptional examples which refer to other purposes. These exceptional examples, which are cited in Reference II of Appendix One, show that some vessels were used for serving living people. II-1 to 11-11, 11-22, 11-23 and 11-25 are the examples in which we know that the vessels' purposes included ancestral rites, while this point is not certain in II-12 to 11-21 and 11-24. Some examples have been already cited because they include the word xiao # . II-1, II-3, II-4, II-5, H-7, II-9 and II-11 state that each vessel is that "of" an ancestor. According to Minao Hayashi (1968), in the Shang period this 2.& expression meant that the vessel belonged to each ancestor, that is, it was used by him for his own eating or offerings to his ancestors, not that it is the vessel "for" him. In the same paper Hayashi asserts that the meaning changed to be the vessel "for" him in the Western Zhou period, but, as he clearly proved in another book, the expression of the vessel "of" an ancestor continued to mean that it was used by him (1984, p. 148-50). Thus, we can assume that "the vessel of somebody" meant the vessel used by him and, if he is deceased, the vessel used by him as an ancestral spirit to eat and drink in the ancestral rites for himself. Therefore, the fact that "the vessel of an ancestor" was used to "make our sons of lineages and hundreds of descendants come" (II-1), and to "entertain the envoys" of King (II-5) and so on, shows certainly that ancestral rites included those functions. If so, in the cases in which ancestral rites are not mentioned, the vessels were perhaps assigned to certain ancestors. Indeed it is possible to think that to "offer dishes to officers, friends and in-laws" is one purpose of the vessel, and to "make offerings to august grandfather and father" is another (H-6), but they should be included in the purposes of ancestral rites. In the chapter on "Shaolao Kuishi ^ > $ | § ^ (offering food with sheep and pig)" of the Yili Htfllf, which hands down to us the program of ancestral rites among the nobles, sacrifices to ancestors are always accompanied by a banquet for relatives and guests. There is no doubt that Western Zhou people regarded ancestral rites as the opportunity to promote intimacy in and among lineage groups. Next, the meanings of words such as "brothers" or "guests" should be examined to make clear the extent of ancestral rites' function. "The son(s) of the lineage" (zongzi y^-f- ) is a term usually understood as meaning the head of a lineage group or his heir. In discussing the "Shan-ding" (II-1), Yang Shuda ^WM  says; Zongzi 7i?^ p has three possible meanings, when it appears in 3 0 classical books. First, Zheng Xuan fH$3£ says that zongzi refers to sons of the King's principal wife, in his commentary to the passage, "Zongzi is a fortified wall T ^ ^ I H ^ " found in the Ode Ban IS (No.254) in the Book of Odes. Secondly, Zheng says that zongzi xj?^1 refers to an heir, as can be seen from the passage, "when zongzi does not have his [living) father, his mother orders him ^^p$£;$£, M$i£-" in the Shihun ± f | chapter in the Yili # | f . Thirdly, Zheng says that zong ^ means dazong X ^ (=major lineage or main family), citing, "Sons of a principal wife and of other wives serve zongzi and zongfu [= zongzi's principal wife). Though high-ranking or rich, they should not dare to enter the house of zongzi because of their high rank or wealth j § ^ j ^ « ^ g m M S , ^ K t f A ^ f ^ H;" in the Neize [*JM(J chapter of the Book of Rites. In this inscription (=the "Shan-ding"), it is reasonable to interpret the term according to the second or the third meaning (Yang 1952, p.215). If the second theory is the case, those whom Shan wants to invite are his own heir and other members of his lineage. (Baisheng Hf#i will be discussed later). In the case of the third theory, Shan is not a head of a dazong XTH lineage group but that of a collateral segment, and he wants to make the former come to attend his ancestral rites. This is not an impossible interpretation, but it sounds a little strange because it means that a dazong XSK lineage head who should supervise other heads of xiaozong /JN^ collateral segments instead served them. Shan is ordered to succeed the assignment of his father and given the banner of his grandfather (or ancestor) in this inscription, so he must have been in a main family-line for some generations. Guo Moruo thinks that this zongzi T^-p indicated the sons of a main family; probably he identifies baisheng H:5; as the members of collateral segments, and zongzi ^-f-  as those in a direct line (Guo 1935, p.65). His opinion is closer to the 3 1 first definition of Zheng Xuan, cited by Yang. It seems that Yang's conclusion is more widely accepted than Guo's, but the situation is not so simple. The earliest usage of zongzi T^-? in classical texts is that of the Ode Ban, which says; The great men are a fence; the great multitude [i.e. army) is a wall; the great (feudal) states are a screen; the great (royal) clan is a support; their cherishing the virtue (is =) gives peace; the men of the (royal) clan are a fortified wall; do not let that wall be ruined; may he (= the king) not fear (solitariness =) to be left alone. (No.254, Karlgren 1945, p.77) mAmm. Ammm, Anmm. A^mm,  mmmm.  mi'mm,  mwn * . MMWi&.  (MS-HY p.66) This ode is cited twice in the Zuozhuan. Zongzi ^~f~  refers to the princes of the Duke of Jin in "the fifth year of Duke Xi". And it refers to the main family of Hua Hai 3$k$Si  in the Song state in "the sixth year of Duke Zhao" (CQ-HY P.94 and 361); that is, the former uses the term accordance with the first definition of Zheng Xuan, and the latter the third definition [16] . The contents of the ode also seem to suggest that zongzi "m-f refers not to a particular person such as a head of a main line or his heir but to people of a somewhat wider range, because the analogy of " fortified wall (cheng ^ or a city)", as well as those of "a fence ^|", "a wall JH" and "a screen M",  has the connotation of a barrier for protecting a head. As is well known, ancient Chinese cities (cheng 1$) were always surrounded by a rampart. Therefore, we can assume zongzi ^ is a kind of group whose character is somewhat similar to "the great states AM"  and "the great clan A^",  which can be understood as meaning the maximal lineage of the King, that is, the nobles sharing the same descent and surname with the King. Actually, there are those who think that zongzi refers to "the members of a lineage" wider than 3 2 "the sons of a direct line". This idea was presented first by Zhu Xi ^ ^ (Shijing Jizhuan MWLMffi  vol.6, p.137), who says that zongzi is the people of the same surname, and supported by Chen Huan Esfj jfe. and Yang Bojun %i&1%  (Yang 1981 p.305). It is not appropriate in the case of the "Shan-ding" to understand zongzi 7}5^ P as meaning the general members of a dazong ^C^?, maximal lineage, however, because the term "baisheng H^fe" means the general members of the lineage; the status of zongzi is clearly above that of the latter. We can assume that a zongzi ^ ^ represents a more restricted range of people than the dazong major lineage. Precisely speaking, it corresponds to heads of xiaozong /J^TJ? lineage segments, who have relatively close kin-relations [like brothers or cousins) with the head of a dazong ^C^? lineage. In the inscription of the "Shan-ding", Shan as head of a major lineage hopes to gather together its segments' heads and other general lineage members called "hundreds of descen-dants", which will be discussed below. Baisheng ^ " ^ is usually understood as baixing H t t ("hundred surnames"), but, as this inscription suggests, it has a more limited meaning. Qiu Xigui, in discussing this issue, says that there were main-ly two different interpretations of baixing to be found in the texts. One is that of Mao's Commentary (the early 2nd c. B.C.E.) on the Book of Odes (no. 166; MSZS vol.9-3, p.412), Kong's commentary (the early 4th c. C.E.) to the Book of Documents (Yaodian ^tMl  SSZS vol.2, p.7) and the Chuyu &M  B chapter, (Sec.2, p.571) of the Guoyu g fg C l 7 ] , which understand it as meaning "officialdom". The other is Zheng Xuan's opinion that baixing l f^ means "relatives"; in this he is supported by Guo Moruo. Qiu admits that the original meaning of baisheng H 4 (or baixing Hf#!l;) was the members of the same lineage, and supposes that the term came to be used to refer to nobility in general, because the latter was organized on the basis of lineage structure (Qiu 1983, P. 10-13). We 3 3 can agree with his theory because the word sheng #i, whose graph is also an element of the graph xing M:, meant originally "birth" and then "children through birth" or "descendants", as Joken Kato has discussed by citing Wang Yinzhi (Kato 1940, p.9-12). Shizuka Shirakawa also concludes that sheng #i means the descendants of the same clan (Shirakawa 1969, p.99). But Qiu's idea is not so useful for determining what the term bai-sheng means in each case, because according to him the meaning of the term in Western Zhou texts can be either "descendants" or "nobility". In fact, the meaning of the term dhTers according to the contexts, as in the examples below; "The (King) ordered Shi Song to inspect (the land of) Su. The (official?) colleagues, the heads of villages and baisheng (= nobility) (in Su), leading their mates (=kin?), c a m e " 8 1 to Cheng-zhou." (the "Shisong-gui") "The possessions of my (subordinate) lords and baisheng (=nobles) absolutely must go (=be sent) to the market places (for taxation)." (the "xijia-pan") S « m f t & H £ « , #^gP%rl?) 0 (^tPM ) "The King ordered the upper officers and Shi Yin to (administer) a great convention in Chengzhou and to treat baisheng (=nobles) to a feast of pig." (the "Chenchen-you") i ^ - ± ± %$U%^f$.m.  #  W£8§c 0 (gjgi i ) Shirakawa understands all of these usages as meaning "lineage (or clan?) members"; according to him, baisheng H 4 in the last example is the relatives of the person who produced the vessel (1964, p.345), and that in the first is the members of a clan that inhabited each village, led by each head of the village (1969, p. 180). Michiharu ltd also thinks 3 4 that xing #4 (=sjheng %.)  in the first example is a "kin group" (though we do not know what he exactly means by "kin group"), but his opinion is different from Shirakawa's, because he assumes that each village was composed of plural "kin groups". It is possible in this first example to understand baisheng H 4 as referring to the members of a lineage or lineages that were also the members of a village. It is hardly believ-able, however, that every townsman could be taken to Chengzhou J5£je|I. (The land of Su M  was about fifty kilometers north-east of Chengzhou, because the former is identified with Wenxian M.W:  of Henan. Guo 1935, p.72.) We can more reasonably assume that this baisheng U f^e refers to lineage members who were the nucleus of each community, that is, nobility. Baisheng in the second example probably means "nobles" because it is put after "lords INJIJC", although it could mean the people having kinship relations with the Kings. Chen Mengjia's theory about the final case is quite suggestive; he says that the great harmonious convention in Zongzhou TJ?M| was for the lords who were relatives of the Kings, while that in Chengzhou J^KM was for other lords (1955 p.92). His idea is supported by the fact that Chengzhou as strategic position for governing "Eastern Country MM"  was constructed to accommodate many Shang people. If so, baisheng 0 ^ in this example is the people having no blood relation with the Zhou King. Qiu Xigui cites other examples in which Shang nobles are called baisheng by the Zhou King, and he attributes the reason to the lineage structure of Shang society (1983. P-12). Returning to the case of the "Shan-ding", we can admit that this baisheng W f^e should be understood as lineage members, because it would not make sense for Shan to say "to make the nobility come", and because the term points to a more limited range of people than "friends", who are thought to have included the people having kin-relations (this will be discussed later), as its position before the term "friends" in 11-12 3 5 shows. In addition, the inscription of the "Shisong-ding" cited above shows that the people called baisheng in the restricted area are the nobles under the control of a lord, while the term in a general sense means the nobility from the view of the King, in the inscriptions of the "Xijia-ban" and the "Chenchen-you". Here Shan is a lord, so this bai-sheng includes also the nobles under the control of Shan. In other words, we can assume that this baisheng means the members of the lineage whose lineage head is Shan and who belong to some different segments. But this assumption does not necessarily eliminate the possibility that it includes subordinates who do not have any definite blood relationship with Shan. In the inscription of 11-12, "friends (pengyou J5H^)" is placed below baisheng, the meaning of which is assumed to be the same as in the "Shan-ding". The term pengyou is usually understood in the sense in which we are using it, but Qian Zongfan MT&M  (1978, p.272+282) and Zhu Fenghan #cJH$& CI990, p.306-311) define the term as "lineage members" just like baisheng. The evidence they adduce is worth paying attention to on two points. The first is the sentences in the Zengzi Zhiyan H"^©] H chapter of the Dadai Liji ^ ; ^ ^ f B they cite, which refer to the enemies of parents, brothers, "friends" and relatives; there the "friends" placed between brothers and relatives are reasonably thought to mean people having kinship relations. One should not live a life in the same (world) that an enemy of his parents lives in. One should not live in a state where an enemy of his brother lives. One should not live in a town where there is an enemy of his friend. One should not live in a neighborhood where there is an enemy of his kinsmen. ##£», *mm&.  H<££», * H * B . ffliczm, ^mmn a Mhz W, ^ H M o (Dadai Liji vol.5, p.58) Secondly, the usage of the term in a passage in the "the fourteenth year 3 6 of Duke Xiang" of the Zuozhuan is replaced by the term "subordinate brothers Wk~?'t&''  in "the second year of Duke Huan". So, this suggests "friends" can be equated with lineage members. Therefore, the Son of Heaven has his dukes; princes of States have their high ministers; ministers have (the Heads of] their collateral families; dignitaries have the members of the secondary branches of their families; inferior officers have their friends. ("The Four-teenth Year of Duke Xiang", Legge 1972, p.466) mm, 3*c?w^ n&Gm*  mm^m, **wic^ ±WJK£. (CQ-HY p.281) Therefore, the Son of Heaven establishes States; princes of States establish (collateral) clans. Ministers establishes their collateral families; dignitaries have their secondary branches; officers have their sons and brothers as their servants, ("the second year of Duke Huan", Legge 1972, p .41) [ , 9 ] m^&m. mm^m.  i i i i i , **WJK^, ±*rat^&. (CQ-HY P.27) The first example may be understood as showing that "friends" means relatives or in-laws who are more distantly related than "brothers". Because "friends" are clearly distinguished from in-laws in the inscriptions of Western Zhou (H-6 and 11-11), we can assume that "friends" includes distant relatives. The reason that "friends" is placed after "hundreds of descendants" in II-12 is that the concept of the former is more inclusive than that of the latter. The word hungou # j § is put after "friends" in II-6 and 11-11 and refers to lineages related by marriage for generations, as Takayuki Tanida has discussed (1975 p.7). It can be assumed that it is positioned after "friends" because it does not involve the members of the same lineage. In 11-24 the term is placed between "brothers 5£5&" and "seniors l^i^s", and the former doubtlessly refers to lineage members as well as real brothers, because it is used as a classificatory term. This 3T point is also proved by II-2 where the phrase "many brothers and sons (duodizi # ^ ^ ) " is placed before "my grandsons [wo sun ^c#)", so we can assume that dizi ^ ^ is to "grandsons $k"  in II-2 what zongzi ^ ^ is to baisheng H^i in II—1. But there is a problem with "seniors" in 11-24; though it seems to mean the senior members of Jinglinangfu's lineage, two examples of zong-lao ^ ^ or "seniors of a lineage" in the Guoyu MM  suggest that this term represents "retainer" or "steward". One is in the last part of the Luyu Hn§ chapter B (Sec.15, p.210), which tells us that the "senior of the lineage" was invited to a banquet by the mother of Gongfu Wenbo Q5£ jCiti when she wanted her son to marry, and the term "seniors of a lineage" is replaced by "retainers of a lineage" Czongchen T}?E§) later [ 2 0 ] . Another example is Sec.3 of the Chuyu JHfp chapter A (p.532), where a "senior of the lineage" is invited to listen to the last words of Qu Dao ®PJ, noble of the state of Chu. The relationship between the "senior" and Qu Jian Jjg|t, son of Qu Dao, is described as the relationship between a retainer and a prince t 2 1 ] . Thus, "seniors" in this sense are identified with "stewards" [zai ^ ) or "seniors of a room ^ ^ " in the Zuozhuan ("the twenty-second year of Duke Xiang", Legge 1972, p.495, CQ-HY p.296, and "the seventeenth year of Duke Cheng", Legge 1972, p.404, CQ-HY p.247). However, the usage of the term zonglao does not always indicate "steward" because it is the only object of "offering filiality" in the inscription of the "Xinzhongji-ding" (1-45), which was discussed above, and it is not reasonable that only stewards, instead of lineage members, attended ancestral rites. But as far as the case of 11-23 is concerned, we can understand it as showing that the functions of ancestral rites extended from relatives to retainers. In addition, we have to take into consideration the possibility that a kinsman of a lineage head was appointed as a steward. In "the fourth year of Duke Zhao" of the Zuozhuan, the steward of the Shusun MM 3 8 family, whose name is Niu ^ , is a son of the family head (Legge 1972, p.599, CQ-HY p.355). While what has been discussed above is more or less concerned with lineage structures and kin relations, another category of human relations in which ancestral rites function is lord-retainer relations. "The King" is referred to in II-3 and II-4, "the Marquis" in 11-13, and "the envoys (shiren $lA)" in H-5, 11-18 and 11-20. These examples show that bronze vessels for ancestral rites were used to entertain the King's envoys, and the inscription of the "Ke-xu" [II-6) includes the "officers (shiyin © ^ ) " , which are thought to indicate Ke's super-visors. This cannot but be recognized as meaning that the King's envoys or supervisors attended the ancestral rites of their inferiors in some way. We cannot describe how they took part in the inferiors' rites, because of the lack of records, but it can be imagined that the King sent an envoy to commemorate his retainer's rites, or that a supervisor attended his inferior's rites as a guest. Inscriptions 11-13, II-14, II-19 and II-20, which are a part of the so-called Mai |£ group inscrip-tions and are the products of the same person, state that the King came to Mai's house to "glorify" Mai, though this does not seem to be related to any ancestral rites C2Z]. By observing how the terms discussed here are arranged in bronze inscriptions, we can discern a rule or pattern. That is, a term refer-ring to a higher status is positioned before a term representing a lower status, and a term referring to a closer relationship with a vessel's producer is before a term referring to a distant relationship. Thus, if an inscription includes the term "King" and the term "brothers", the former is positioned before the latter. In the case of "zongzi 'm-f'"  and "baisheng H^fe", zongzi is before baisheng because baisheng is a term representing a more distant and inclusive range of people. This can be summarized as follows: 3 9 II—4. King - colleagues II-5. King friends II-6. officers friends — in- laws I I -1 . zongzi - ba i sheng 11-12. ba isheng friends children and wivies [Z3 11-24. brothers in- laws seniors 11-11. friends - in- laws CHART ONE: At tendan t s a t ances t ra l r i tes in the Western Zhou period This seems not to be the resul t of coincidence but to be an intent ional a r rangement . To sum up, the functions of ances t ra l r i tes were recognized by Western Zhou people to be mainly in two ca tegor ies of human re la t ion-ships, one of which was the relat ionship be tween a King or a lord and his re ta iners . The former interfered in the ances tor worship of the la t ter in some way in order to s t r eng then their bonds symbolically. The other relat ionship was t h a t be tween a l ineage head and other l ineage members, or between l ineages t h a t had some kind of a kin-rela t ionships with each other. This of course symbolized solidarity within a l ineage and harmony between l ineages. The la t te r ca tegory of human relationships was also the sphere in which the ethics of filiality worked. It is obvious t h a t this ca tegory of human relat ionships is more prominent than the monarch- re ta iner relation in the Western Zhou inscriptions. It is this point t h a t presents a sharp cont ras t to the Chunqiu si tuat ion, which shall be discussed next . (4) The function of ances t ra l r i tes in t h e Chunqiu period 4 0 In Chunqiu bronze inscriptions, as well as in Western Zhou inscriptions, there are examples which describe the vessels' purposes (See Reference 11-26 to 44). These examples, basically sharing the features of the Western Zhou examples, state that the vessels are used for both ancestral rites and other related purposes. The first impression that these examples give is that the functions of ancestral rites are not necessarily reduced in the Chunqiu period. The number of the cited inscriptions is not significantly less than that of Western Zhou. Also we can find such familiar terms as "hundred descendants" and "friends". This may be the proof that ancestor worship continued to function well in spite of the gradually increasing dis-organization of lineage groups, which will be discussed later. But this does not mean that there was no difference between the two periods. A closer examination is required. The first point that becomes noticeable when comparing them is the lack of the mention of "matri-monial relatives" in the Chunqiu examples. In fact, this phrase seems not to appear in the Chunqiu bronze inscriptions at all, which might reflect a change in ancestral rites and their diminishing effectiveness for strengthening solidarity among lineages. Secondly, the terms referring to lineage members in general like "brothers 5EIH" and "hundreds of descendants Hf^ fc" are less used than in Western Zhou examples; "brothers [xiongdi 5EIH)" appear once in 11-26 and "hundreds of descendants" once in 11-40. There is no example of "sons of a lineage (zongzi TJfc-f'Y, though zongfu zf?|# or "the lady of a lineage" is mentioned in two inscriptions [ 2 4 ] . The term xiaozi /JN^P or "small son" whose connotation as a segment head has been studied by Hidemi Kimura (1981) [25] is still used, but it is usually used when one calls himself "young man"; there is no case in which the term suggests the relation between a lineage head and a segment head under his control, except for one (the inscriptions of the "Chenni-fu", 1-81). As far as one can judge from 4 1 bronze inscriptions, one cannot but conclude that the role of ancestral rites in symbolizing the loyalty of lineage members to their lineage and the bond between lineages was diminishing in its significance. It would be misleading, however, if we put too much stress on this aspect. This is because another word seems to have being used to refer to the close relatives who are invited to ancestral rites by a lord, "family (jia ^ ) " , in H-29 and 11-34. The word jia, tentatively translated into "family" here, means "house" or "household" and corresponds with the range of shi ^ or "room", as has been discussed by Seiichi Onozawa CI959). In fact, both words are combined into a compound word shijia ^ ^ in 11-30. According to Onozawa, the group of shi was a residential and economic unit, including agnates and their wives of three generations, and corresponded with a minimal segment of a lineage, the so-called xiaozong /JNTJ? group. His study also shows that this group tended to split into smaller groups in the Chunqiu period, because property became distributed among brothers Cp-46, 49). The Chunqiu usage of the word jia in the context of attendants at ancestral rites probably suggests that ancestral rites were significant for the smaller range of kinship relations than in the Western Zhou period. The inscription of the "Chenni-fu ^ j ^ 3 [ , referred to above, is an exceptional example, which talks about the relationship between a lineage head and a member: Chen Ni, a young son, said, "I am a distant grandson of Chen Huan. I prudently served the Marquis of Ji and worried about my main family. I select auspicious bronze to make an auspicious vessel for my principal wife Jijiang and casts this precious fu-vessel. Using the vessel, I will make offerings and offer filiality to my main lineage's august grandfather, august grandmother, august father and august mother, so as to ask for immortality, longevity and myriad years. May the sons and grandsons (of Chen Ni) eternally keep (this 4 2 vessel) and use it!" (1-81) m, mm^&.  Em=«ojR7cE^#£¥c= nm.  mm  f c=»)^c=S). &>&&> % (=#)^*^ ± c=S) i t c=a) ^  t=mm  ± c=M) ^ c=*) £c= M)#, ^#*ifrJIM^ ^ "^" | | (=*)Mo There is another bronze vessel made by Chen Ni, which says; "Ni [= I), a distant grandson of the Chen family, produce (this) gui-vessel of august grandfather of the main lineage so as to ask for an eternal mandate and longevity. May the sons and grandsons (of Chen Ni) keep (and use the vessel!)" (the "Chenni-gui") &m&:fffiMM/EL=m% ± §(=Mffi)*^^ Sk  f (=^ ) ||C=*)^  % (= mm. T M & O CK&R ) Chen Ni ISJlji* appears in the "fifteenth year of Duke Ai" in the Zuozhuan, and there he is described as a relative of Chen Heng E^ fM (the early fifth century B.C.). head of Chen lineage. Because Chen Heng is a grand-son of Chen Huan BJftHi and Chen Ni talks of himself as "a distant grand-son" of Chen Huan, Chen Ni is probably a cousin or a son of a cousin from the viewpoint of the lineage head of that time. "August grand-father" in the inscriptions may be Chen Huan, and he is called dazong Jz ^ or "main lineage" because he is in the direct line of the lineage head, Chen Heng. In other words, Chen Ni is worshipping an apical ancestor who connects him with the main family. It will be recalled that this is a common phenomenon in the Western Zhou period. The strong solidarity of Chen lineage members is a exceptional case in the Chunqiu period, as Yukio Ota states (1969, p. 197), but the existence of it cannot be ignored. One may point out that the term fuxiong 5£5Z ("fathers and brothers") represents kinship relations. Indeed, it resembles the Western Zhou term xiongdi jil5$ or "brothers", and appears frequently in Chunqiu inscriptions (11-31, 32, 38, 39, 40, 41 and 44). However, it is 4 3 unlikely that this term literally means "fathers and brothers". The first reason lies in its position in phrases; it is placed between "fine guests" and "gentlemen" in 11-38 and 11-40, and between "fine guests" and "friends" in 11-41. The term is either below "fine guests" or above "gentlemen". In 11-37, between "fine guests" and "friends" is placed "dignitaries". "Ministers" is positioned below "fine guests" in 11-36, and "dignitaries" above "gentlemen" in 11-43. In short, "fathers and brothers" and "ministers" or "dignitaries" are similarly positioned, as shown in the figure below: 11-34). family guests 11-35). his own body dignitaries gentlemen (= himself) 11-36). guests — dignitaries 11-37). guests — dignitaries friends 11-38). guests — fathers & brothers — gentlemen [26] II-39). guests — fathers & brothers 11-40). guests — fathers & brothers — gentlemen 11-41). guests — fathers & brothers friends 11-42). guests friends 11-43). dignitaries gentlemen II-44). fathers & brothers — gentlemen CHART TWO: Attendants at ancestral rites in the Chunqiu period Secondly, it can be proved by examining classical texts that the term fuxiong j£H does not simply indicate lineage members. When Duke of Wei was attacked by enemy troops, he said that he would abdicate the throne in favor of anyone that could save the state. As we read in the Zuo-zhuan, in "the eighteenth year of Duke Xi": 4 4 The Marquis of Wei offered to resign in favour of any one of his fathers, elder brothers, sons, younger brothers and the people of the Court. [Assembling them in the Court, he said,) "If anyone is able to deal with the enemy, I will gladly follow him." (Legge 1972, P .172)C27] mmummxR?%Rm$t, a, ^mm^j^m^M,  CCQ-HY P.IU) "People of the court" are equivalent to guoren H A or "citizen" which corresponds to shi dr or "gentlemen". The phrase "fathers and elder brothers, sons and younger brothers ^ H " ? ! ^ " refers to ministers and dignitaries. In "the twenty-second year of Duke Zhao" in the same book, when the Hua ljl family of the Song state rose in revolt, the Duke of Song said to the King of Chu; For my want of ability, I was not able to love my fathers and brothers, thereby occasioning sorrow to your ruler. (Legge 1972, p.692) [ 2 8 ] W f f S ^mMMXR,  Sl&mMo  (CQ-HY P.407) Because the phrase "fathers and brothers" refers to the Hua family, whose founder is a son of Duke Dai M4k  of Song (Gu Liangao, p.413. According to the Shiben Ht^ cited in the Chunqiu Zuozhuan Zhengyi #$C -fcfillEiit vol.50, p.397), the Hua family had a blood relationship with the Duke of Song, but the relationship was quite distant. The Jinyu Hff!} E (no.7) in the Guoyu MM  says; Fan Wenzi came back from the Court late in the evening. Wuzi [= Wenzi's father) said, "Why are you so late?" (Wenzi) replied, "There was a guest from the Qin state, who asked (us) riddles (to guess) in the Court. There was no dignitary who could answer. I knew three things about what the guest asked, (so I told him them)." Wuzi got angry and said, "It is not that the dignitaries were unable to answer. They gave way to their fathers and brothers." 4 5 te, s a n g. SHMKB , **#*^-t& , a^Htii o (p . 40D It is clear that Wuzi meant "seniors" here. Naturally this kind of "father and brothers" could include real relatives; when Duke Wen of Teng tried to practice the three year mourning that Mencius recommended him to observe, the Duke's "fathers, brothers and all the officials 5^52 0 W " did not want to (Lau 1984, p.95). Zhao Qi jffi& (108?-201) says in his commentary on this, "(The phrase) 'fathers, brothers and all the officials' refers to many retainers both of the same clan as (Duke) Wen of Teng and of other clans. £ H l f i \ B^C^i^^^^^^o  " Thus, Zhao recognizes that "fathers and brothers" are the people who had some kinship relations with Duke Wen (MZZS vol.5a, p.37). Du Yu f±J| (222-284) says that the phrase "fathers and brothers" refers to many retainers of the same clan (as Duke Wu of Zheng) ^ H , I^IttSfE" in his commentary on a sentence in "the eleventh year of Duke Yin" in the Zuozhuan, which reads, "I (=Duke Wu of Zheng) have not been able to secure the repose of only a few fathers and brothers. § A l | ^ ^ - 5 £ J T 1 » ^ t g ^ f f i " (Legge 1972, p.33, CQ-HY p.21). The phrase is used literally in the Zihan -f- ?p chapter (sec.16) of the Analects, where it reads "to serve fathers and brothers when at home AK'JV3£5ii" (LY-HY p. 16, Lau 1983, p.81), because the word ru A ("at home") refers to kinship relations in the Analects, as will be discussed in the next chapter. The post of dignitary was most often filled by the close relatives of dukes in this period, so dignitaries were referred to by kinship terms. Thus, it is not difficult to understand that "fathers and brothers" came to refer to high ranked retainers. We can conclude that this phrase dealt with a lord-retainer relation rather than kinship. Connected with the above, it can be pointed out that the Chunqiu bronze inscriptions use such words concerned with lord-retainer relations as "dignitaries (dafu A ^ ) " and "gentlemen (shi ± ) " , which do not appear in Western Zhou inscriptions. The reason for this is the 46 change in the motives of making inscriptions. In the Western zhou period a bronze inscription was basically made to commemorate the grace of a king to a retainer, and was inclined to emphasize the loyalty of the retainer (that is, the person who had a vessel cast) to the king. On the otherhand, Chunqiu bronze vessels were made to display the status of those who had vessels cast, and tended to emphasize the loyalty of their retainers to them. In other words, Chunqiu inscriptions tell us more about the function of ancestral rites to control retainers, while Western Zhou bronzes talk more about the interference of King/lords in his/their retainers' ancestor worship. It is not certain how this change reflects actual changes in ancestor worship, because the function of ancestral rites for controlling retainers could have existed in the Western Zhou period, though this is not specifically stated in any existing sources. But one thing can certainly be assumed; that is, because of the loss of the power of Zhou Kings, one of the political functions of ancestral rites diminished in its significance, and another came to the forefront. In the later period, the ancestral rites of lords symbolized the solidarity and loyalty of the people to their states. Next, we can point out that "guests 3 § ^ " are much more stressed than in Western Zhou inscriptions. In the Chunqiu inscriptions, "guests" are placed below "family" and above "ministers", "dignitaries", or "fathers and brothers". That is, they are between the family of a lord and retainers, so it is reasonable to assume that they are the guests from other states. Because the power of Zhou King decreased, the relations between states may have became more important. Finally, it seems that the connotation of the word "friends JJf}^" changed in the Chunqiu period. While in the Western Zhou bronzes it refers to the nobles including remote relatives, in the Chunqiu examples this word is positioned under "dignitaries" (11-37), "fathers and brothers" (11-41) or "fine guests" (11-42). This position is similar to 4 ^ that of shi dr or "gentlemen". When we compare the functions of ancestral rites in the Chunqiu period with those of the Western Zhou, we can recognize certain changes. First, while Western Zhou bronzes stress the function of integrating the lineage and lineages, that is, the control of a lineage head over segment heads and other members and the bonds with other lineages, in Chunqiu inscriptions there is a general tendency for this function to become less important. Secondly, there is a possibility that the range of kinship relations in which ancestral rites functioned became narrower in the Chunqiu period, as the word "family "$£."  suggests. In other words, the group on which the rites were based came to correspond with a minimal segment, while that in the Western Zhou period corresponded to a whole lineage. Thirdly, the stress which was put on the interference of a king or a lord in his retainer's ancestral rites in the Western Zhou period, by the Chunqiu was transferred to the attendance of retainers at their master's rites. That is, in the former a retainer's rites expressed his bond with the King, but in the latter a lord's rites exhibited his control over retainers. Changes in the bronze inscriptions indicate that the control of lords over retainers was prominent in the Chunqiu period, in contrast with that of lineage heads over lineage members in the Western Zhou. Fourth, the Chunqiu inscriptions mention relations between states, which do not often appear in the Western Zhou bronzes. Finally, we have to take into account the basic continuity be-tween these two periods in spite of their differences. The function of strengthening the solidarity in a lineage continued to exist in the Chunqiu period, and the emphasis on the attendance of retainers at their lord's ancestral rites can be assumed to have already existed during the Western Zhou. C5) Conclusion 4 8 We have studied the idea of filiality and the changes of its usage in the first two sections, and ideas about the functions of ancestral rites in the last two sections. What is known about filiality in the Western Zhou period is that it was an ideology supporting the authority of a lineage group, and that it was mainly expressed in ancestral rites. This was the reason why the objects of filiality included not only parents and ancestors but also seniors and matrimonial relatives; it was the social structure woven by patrilineal descent principles that was sacred. In the Chunqiu period, the object of filiality became narrower, and this was the result of changes in ancestor worship, though one can not put too much stress on this point. Western Zhou people thought of the main function of ancestral rites as lying in the sphere of kinship relations, both in a lineage and among lineages, and it is clear that this sphere corresponded with the objects of their filiality. In the Chunqiu period, this function seems to have been de-emphasized, and the basic group for the rites shifted from a whole lineage to a segment. This does not mean that ancestral rites became unrelated to the whole lineage, but that collateral segments came to be understood as retainers rather than as relatives, though they continued to attend as before. This shift is reasonably assumed to have been accompanied by the change in the usage of the word xiao expressed in the bronze inscriptions. Thus, the object of filiality came to be restricted to parents and ancestors. Considered from the social point of view, this situation can be interpreted in two ways. One is to assume that the power of lineage heads became strong enough to regard other lineage members as his retainers. There is evidence to support this hypothesis. For example, as Takayuki Tanida has discussed (1968, 71), the gradual establishment of 4 9 direct lineal succession reflected the reinforcement of patriarchy. The case of the Zhao family of the Jin state is an example of the change from lineage headship into monarchy, as Takao Hirase has noted (Hirase 1985). The case of the Tian family seems to be another example of this kind, though it succeeded in establishing its hegemony by dealing with its retainers as pseudo-relatives (Ota 1976, p.279). Another possible interpretation is to assume that there existed a general tendency for each segment of a lineage to become more independent of other segments. This process accompanied the disorganization of lineages. This theory has already been discussed by many scholars [Joken Kato 1940, p.572-576, Mitsuo Matsumoto 1956, Tatsuo Masubuchi 1961, Sadao Nishijima 1981, p.12-14, Hu Fangshu 1983). Disorganization included such phenomena as follows; the cycle of segmentation was accelerated, and each segment was forced to become independent before attaining maturity. Each lineage, along with the range of the control of its head was more restricted, and diverging lineages from an apical ancestor shared only a loose sense of relationship. Unstable political conditions made it difficult to maintain a large inclusive lineage, and thus each member tended to follow his own interests. In cases where lineage heads succeeded in monopolizing honors for generations, such as in the cases of the Tian family and of the Zhao family, the tendency of each segment's increased degree of independence caused the main family to oversee its lineage members not in terms of lineage relations but in terms of lord-vassal relations. We know that the functions of ancestral rites were related with two kinds of human relationships: kinship relations and monarch-retainer relations. The latter relation was more prominent in the Chunqiu inscriptions than in those of the Western Zhou. When the significance of patrilineal descent system diminished in the Chunqiu period, the monarch-retainer relation became more prominent in ancestral rites than S O the kinship relation, and more stress was put on the family-line of a vessel's producer. Thus, ancestral rites were recognized as an occasion in which the authority of a monarch was displayed to his retainers. In other words, the essential ideology expressed in ancestral rites, which was none other than filiality, gradually lost its effectiveness. Although filiality could express the authority of society itself in the Western Zhou period when the whole society was based on lineage structure, the authority implied by filiality no longer corresponded to that of the whole society in the Chunqiu period, when lineages began to be smaller. There filiality could work only in a fragmentary lineage, that is, in a single line of ancestry. Perhaps too much emphasis has been put on the changes in this section. As has been repeatedly pointed out, there was a basic continuity between the Western Zhou and Chunqiu, both in social structure and ancestor worship. The changes were gradual. But it is also certain and important that some changes did happen, important because the concept of filiality in the Chunqiu period was the source from which some Zhanguo thinkers developed the philosophy of filiality. (5) A supplement: filiality in the Zuozhuan The change in the meaning of filiality is reflected in its usage in the Zuozhuan. Since this book was compiled in the Zhanguo period, it can be dealt with as a source reflecting a transitional situation between the Chunqiu and Zhanguo periods. Most references to filiality appear in moralistic statements thought to be the latest parts of the book [Ogura 1970, p.32-35). There are only two examples which show the relationship between filiality and ancestral rites; When a prince ascends to the throne, he shows his affection for the 5 1 states whose princes are related to him by affinity, cultivates all relationships by marriage, and takes a principal wife, to offer grain-vessels (to ancestor). This is filial piety, and filial piety is the beginning of propriety. (Legge 1972, p.235) [ 2 9 ] ^©gpft, iff-nm.  mmm,  STC#B, &.mm&*  #m, # , a^as-a. ("the second year of Duke Wen", CQ-HY p. 149) Here filiality is something to be offered to ancestors, but it includes harmonious relationship with in-laws. To avoid the powerful and insult the weak is contrary to valour. To take advantage of another's straits is contrary to benevolence. To cause the destruction of your ancestral temple and the discontinuance of its sacrifices is contrary to filial piety. To take action which does not (lead to) a good reputation is contrary to wisdom. (Legge 1972, p.757) -&„ ("the fourth year of Duke Ding", CQ-HY P.445) The phrase "to cause the destruction of an ancestral temple" is a metaphor for discontinuing one's own family-line. In these examples, the concept of filiality includes ancestral rites, but the term xiao is not used as a verb, as in bronze inscriptions. The word bears an ethical meaning in most of examples. A prominent feature of its usage in the Zuozhuan is that "filiality" is ranked among other virtues. For instance, "the twentieth year of Duke Zhao" reads; To hurry to death for the liberation of our father is filial duty; to act on a calculation of what can be accomplished is virtue; to select one's duty to be performed and go to it is wisdom; to know death is before him and not try to avoid it is valour. (Legge 1972, p.681) HY p.399) 5 2 The Zuozhuan also tells us that Duke Dao of Jin had the sons of ministers taught respectfulness, frugality, filiality and deference in the "eighteenth year of Duke Cheng" (CQ-HY, p.250) [ 3 0 ] . Other noteworthy passages in the Zuozhuan as follows: The ruler righteous and the minister acting (accordingly); the father kind and the son filial [ 3 1 ] ; the elder brother loving and the younger respectful. (Legge 1972, p. 14) mm. E f i \ 5£iL ^ # , fig, Bffo ("the third year of Duke Yin, CQ-HY P.9) Filiality, reverence, loyalty and faith are auspicious virtues. [32] # , $C, ,&> ft , ^ef t ic , ("the eighteenth year of Duke Wen" CQ-HY, p. 1761 That the ruler order and the subject obey, the father be kind and the son filial, the elder brother loving and the younger respectful, the husband be harmonious and the wife gentle, the mother-in-law be kind and the daughter-in-law obedient; these are things in propriety. (Legge 1972, p.718) m*. e*, £&, ^# , a s , mffc, 5fefu, mm.  t&m. » 0 rthe Twenty-sixth year of Duke Zhao" CQ-HY, P423) These examples can be interpreted as showing that filiality was one of many virtues, not an ethic of obedience to the general authority of society, and that its definition was more limited to affection and submission to one's parents. This is also supported by the passages in "the first year of Duke Yin". Yinkaoshu was purely filial; he loved his mother and his influence reached Duke Zhuang. (See Legge 1972, p.6) m^um^iko g£#. ISM^O (CQ-HY p.3) Filiality is equal to the love to mother. In "the twenty-third year of Duke Xiang", the book says; "Those who are sons of fathers should be distressed lest they should not be filial, not about having no place C= rank). Reverence and honor your father's command; what invariableness attaches (to the order of succession)? If you (=Gongchu) can be filial and respect-ful, it is possible for you to be twice as rich as [the Head of) the Ji family (whose heir Gongchu failed to become). If you are wicked and do not follow the regulations, your misery may be double that of one of the lowest of the people." (Legge 1972, p.502) [ 3 3 ] &AiNf, JS*#, *&mm,  «#£#. M#£#. £&#«, wfg^ ft«r -&„ M^fcG, ^f&TKpHiio (CQ-HY p.300) What the speaker means is that Gongchu's father, who is also the head of the Jisun main family, will be pleased with him if he is filial, which will increase his portion of the inheritance. Here, filiality equals submission to father. The story about Shensheng $ # i , prince of the Jin state, in "the Second year of Duke Min" is quite interesting, because it deals with the conflict between filiality and Tightness, that is, the motif of a virtuous son whose parents' commands are unjust. Another story with the same motif is found in the Mencius, as will be discussed later, but the conclusion forms a striking contrast to that of the Zuozhuan. The story goes like this; Shensheng was a son and an heir of Duke Xian of Jin, an energetic lord who succeeded in conquering some small states around Jin. But after his conquest of Li he took a daughter of the Duke of Li as his wife. She later bore a child. She wanted her child to become the heir and advised Duke Xian to appoint Shensheng as a general, wanting to drive him out of the capital city. The old lord was easily cajoled into consenting. Then, Li Ke MjnL, a minister, remonstrated with the Duke; "It is the business of the eldest son to bear the vessels of millet for the great sacrifices, and for those at altars of the land and the grain, and also to inspect the provisions cooked for the ruler every morning and evening. To lead the army and determine its 5 4 movements and plans, issuing all commands to the troops; this is what the ruler and his chief minister have to provide for; it is not the business of the eldest son. The conduct of an army all depends on the definite commands that are given. If the son (=Shensheng) receives the commands of another, it is injurious to his majesty. If he himself determines the command, he is unfilial." (Legge 1972, p. 130) ift. mmmmzmm^ 0 #*T£*-t»io W U M B , mm^m,  m^m ^ # o (CQ-HY P.84) This seems to mean that a prince should follow his father's instructions in his public duties because he is not a full man before he succeeds his father's status. The remonstrance of Li Ke was not heeded. He then advised the prince, Shensheng, as follows; "As a son, moreover, You have to fear lest you should not be filial; you have not to be fear lest you should not be appointed to the succession. Cultivate yourself, and do not be finding fault with others; so shall you escape calamity." (Legge p. 130) & ? * * # , £ « # # & . ffiBm^MA,  mftMMo  (CQ-HY p.84) But a coachman named Liangyu Ziyang ^ ^ ^ ^ said to him; "It is not filiality if you die; you had better run away1 3 4 1 ." ?EM^#, ^ M £ o (CQ-HY p.84) The administrator of Yangshe ^^§", refuting it, said; "If you disobey your father's command, you will be unfilial. If you abandon the business (entrusted to you), you will be unfaithful. Although you know the harshness (of your duties), you must not choose (to do) evil. You should be willing to die (in obedience to your father." (Legge 1972, p. 130) Sf&*#, mm*&*  mmnm.  m^m* I^MJE^O  (CQ-HY P.84) When Shensheng was about to go on an military expedition, following his 5 5 father's command, Hu Tu M5^ remonstrated with the prince, as below; "Do not do so. The root of disorder is already formed in Jin. Can your succession to the state be made sure? Be filial, and seek the repose of the people. Lay your plan for this. It will be better than endangering yourself and accelerating [the imputation to you of) guilt." (Legge 1972, p.131) * T t f , ^a#fiK£> £RJ&¥, &m&&*  ?&MZ*  mm^^^mm ika CCQ-HY p.85) The last remonstrance is a little difficult to understand, but the phrase "endangering yourself and accelerating guilt" means following father's order and going on a foreign expedition, so Hu Tu perhaps is recommending that he runs away. It is interesting to see here that the filiality conceived of by the four men is divided into two perfectly opposite positions; one is that filiality is to obey one's father even though he is wrong or even when obeying him would bring danger. This rigorous view would be accepted by some Zhanguo philosophers. The other position is to think that filiality does not require one to follow one's father in cases such as that of Shensheng. Its logic is perhaps that one should not follow his father's orders when one knows that it brings danger to his father. But what this position recommends in this case is nothing more than running away, and it seems not to come upon their minds to remonstrate with the father to turn him back to the right way. What should not be overlooked is that the people who appear in the Zuo-zhuan do not always have a consensus about what filiality means in each case, and that there is, at least partially, a tendency for submission to the authority of father to be neglected in favor of one's own safety. Summing up, the usage of filiality in the Zuozhuan is characterized by its more limited objects and a marked decline in its importance. Though it is a new tendency to rarely use the word in ritual contexts, these characteristics are basically the same as the changes we have 5 6 found in Chunqiu bronze inscriptions. Because the book was compiled in a period of rapid social change, changes in its usage of the term seem more clear. srr CHAPTER TWO THE PHILOSOPHY OF FILIALITY OF ZHANGUO THINKERS In the last chapter we have seen the classical connotations of filiality and its gradual reduction in scope. We will see in this chapter how it revived in a new period when society was organized differently from the lineage system in the Western Zhou period. It is the Confucian school that highlighted this old idea and made it a golden rule in Chinese culture. The other schools sometimes referred to the concept of filiality, but, generally speaking, they did not think it so valuable. This does not mean that Zhanguo thinkers other than Confucians denied or were opposed to filiality or familial ethics; for them, mutual affection and respect between parents and children were preferable but something so "natural." Filiality was not enough to bring about peace and order to the "Warring-states (Zhanguo U S ) " situation. For instance, Mo Di SIS (Mozi, 5 c. B.C.E.) thought that philanthropy Cjian ai Ktisl) was the basis of universal ethics; one who loved everyone else necessarily loved his parents, but one who loved only his family might steal from other families to profit his own (Mozi Jiangu, p.92-3). According to Kang Xuewei, the Daoists (Daojia iHl^) did not deny filial affection at all, but they rejected the Confucian concept of filiality, because they thought that this concept distorted, or could even damage, natural affection (Kang 1992, p.215-224). Such a Legalist thinker as Hanfei $| |£, who thought law and monarchial authority supreme, was skeptical about the social function of morals, including filiality. Though the book of his name, Hanfeizi, includes the chapter on "Loyalty and Filiality (Zhongxiao j£# )" , its principal issue is the inviola-bility of governmental authority and political order, and filiality seems to be mentioned merely to deduce loyalty from it. These thinkers' ideas of filiality were in accordance with the 5 8 social situation of filiality in the Zhanguo period, because filiality was reduced from an ethic of obedience to the authority of society into a familial ethic. It was reasonable for them not to take as a central issue a father-son relationship, which was not the principal human relation any more. The problem is why some Confucians discussed filial-ity seriously. It can be expected that discussing filiality, for Confucians, was not preaching to people about submission to parents. If it had been, it would not have needed much energy because affection for parents, involving submission to them, belonged to natural feelings. Filiality was a metaphor for something different. We will see in the next chapter that filiality in the Book of Filiality symbolized submission to social norms and political authority. The problem that the Confucians faced when they developed the philosophy of filiality lay in conflicts between familial affection (= symbol) and political or social authority (=what was symbolized); the former was not in contradiction with the latter when the whole society was based on the lineage principles, but these principles had not entirely corresponded since the collapse of lineages. In addition, absolute monarchy, which was growing during the Zhanguo era, wanted to govern each person directly, breaking up the barriers of clans, lineages or even families. Thus, what we should direct our attention to is how the Confucians succeeded in over-coming the contradiction between familial affection and government or society. [1) Filiality in The Analects It is well known that Confucius C552-479 B.C.E.) was the founding thinker of the Confucian tradition and that his ideas and those of his disciples can be seen in the Analects. The Analects is the most reliable source of the early Confucian school, so this book should be the first 5 9 subject of our argument about the philosophy of filiality in the Zhanguo period. Before studying its contents, however, there are a couple of points to be clarified from a methodological point of view. First, as this chapter will make clear, it is not Confucius but Mencius [372-289 B.C.E.) that put new wine in the old bottle called filiality. References to filiality are not rare in the Analects but that ethic cannot be said to be prominent, compared with humanity pen {H), for example. What is interesting, however, is that we can see in this book almost all the key elements that constituted later discussions of filiality. For instance, references in the Analects to filiality include such ideas as follows: the idea that filiality is the basis for other more general ethics, the assertion that the mental aspect of filiality should be stressed, the idea that filiality is to deny one's free will, an emphasis on following socially regulated forms, the conception of remonstrance and so on. All these ideas can be seen in later documents that discuss filiality, such as the Mengzi ^.-f-  [= the Book of Mencius), the Xunzi ^-f-  (= the Book of Xun Qing), the "Meanings of Rites" CJiyi H?SS) chapter of the Book of Rites, four related chapters in the Dadai Li.ji ^HScijUfB, the chapter on "Filial Behavior" Cxiaoxing # f f ) of the Liishi Chunqiu Bi&^$(.  and the Book of Filiality Cxiaojing #M)- What we should do in studying the philosophy of filiality in the Analects is, therefore, to clarify what kinds of elements Cor features) this philosophy consists of and, then, to compare these elements with those constituting the philosophy of filiality in the other documents; as shown in the following chapters more clearly and in detail, a particular philosophical theme (or motif) is shared by many of these books, but its contextual meaning differs. The next problem is the chronology of the Analects. Though Con-fucius is a figure belonging to the late Chunqiu period because he lived from 552 to 479 B.C.E., he did not write the Analects. As many scholars 6 0 have discussed, it was edited by his disciples' disciples, or even Con-fucians after that, because it includes the sayings of his disciples [1] . This means that we cannot consider the philosophy of the book as the product of a particular individual. Confucius and his disciples must have, more or less, different opinions. It is desirable, therefore, to study each philosopher's view of filiality and to compare them with each other. However, this is a difficult task because the Analects does not present a systematic theory of filiality. It is risky to construct a philosopher's idea of filiality from his fragmentary statements. Here we try to understand the general feature of the ideas of filiality which are presented in the Analects; we can assume that the book represents the ideas of filiality that were shared, more or less, by thinkers belonging to a philosophical group. Though this is not the most desir-able method, it will be helpful for us to have a general view of common ideas about filiality in the early to middle stages of the pre-Han Confucian school. Of around five hundred episodes in the Analects, about thirty are concerned with filiality. The most basic idea of filiality in them is that filiality is an important and elementary ethic or, in other words, it is the basis of more general ethics, as is shown in a couple of general references to it; 1). The master said, "a young man's duty is to be filial to his parents at home and show deference to his elders out of his home, to be cautious in giving promises and punctual in keeping them, to have kind feeling towards everyone, and to draw near to the good. If, when all that is done, he has any energy to spare, then let him study the polite arts." [1-6, Waley p.84) ?EL 5&^AMIJ#, mm.  mmm,  *&*#, n t . ffw«*. msim JC0 (LY-HY p.l, LYZS vol.1, p.9) 2). Zixia said, "A man who treats betters as betters, wears an air 6 1 of respect, who in serving his father and mother knows how to exert his whole strength, who in the service of his prince will lay down his life, who in intercourse with friends is true to his words . Others may say of him that he still lacks education, but I for my part should certainly call him an educated man. [1-7,  Waley p.84) TIB, USM&, wx®,  mmm^, mm. m%t&%0 H J « 3 ^ t i t Mo S I B * ^ , § & & £ * £ . CLY-HY p.l, LYZS vol.1, p.2) In the latter example, what to "exert his whole strength" exactly means is not clear t2] . Whether or not it refers only to physical aspects, it is certain that "serving father and mother" is a mere part of a whole ethics, which is called ren iz  or humanity. As Xu Fuguan has pointed out, "filiality is a rudimentary step toward humanity". Confucius admits that filiality exists a priori, and talking about filiality is to bring one's own humanity involved in filial piety into consciousness, in order to enable humanity to expand beyond one's own family (Xu 1975, p. 159). This is proved by the logical structure in Example 1) in which the objects expand from the more familiar to the more general, like "at home" —• "out of home" —> "everyone". The stress definitely lies in the wider domain. In other words, filiality is not so important as humanity here; the former is important because it can lead one to the latter. The statement of Master You, which will be discussed later, supports this, when it says, "Filiality to parents and the fraternity to brothers are supposed to be the basis for humanity. #^1fe^f, ^Mi^-^.^-Mo  "  [1-2, Waley p.83, LY-HY p.l) There is room for discussion about "at home A " and "out of home Hi* above. The range of "at home" corresponds to the object of filial-ity, according to the expression "to be filial to his parents at home". The answer is shown in the next example; 3). Zigong asked, "What must a man be like in order that he may be called a true knight (of the Way)?" The Master said, "He who, in the 6 2 furtherance of his own interests, is held back by scruples, who as an envoy to far lands does not disgrace his prince's commission, may be called a true knight." Zigong said, "May I venture to ask who would be next?" The Master said, "He whom his relatives (= zongzu) commend for filial piety, his fellow-villagers, for deference to his elders." (XIII-20, Waley p. 176) ^ « ^ H , ftmW(»im±&a ^EK ffswifc. « I H 3 \ ^mm$t,  ^m± £0 s, mmM&„  B,  mmm^,  mmmmMo  CLY-HY P.26; LYZS vol.13, p.51) Indeed, this can be interpreted as that relatives commend him because of his filiality to his parents. But it is certain that filiality is thought to something belonging to zongzu TKJ£C or a lineage beyond the extent of a household, because it is made a pair of "fellow-villagers" [xiangdang #$iH). We can see that the early Confucian school thought about filiality in a context similar to that of the Western Zhou. Naturally, this does not mean that filiality in the Analects is the same as that in bronze inscriptions. Inspecting the concrete contents of filiality, we find more stress put on mental aspects than on behavior. 4). Zixia asked about the treatment of parents. The Master said, "It is the demeanour that is difficult. Filial piety does not consist merely in young people undertaking the hard work, when anything has to be done, or serving their elders t3] first with wine and food. It is something much more than that." CH-8, Waley p.89) CLY-HY p.3; LYZS vol.2, p.6) Though the word se ^ or "demeanour" is difficult to interpret [4] , this passage clearly shows that Confucius emphasized affection between parents and children, which was showed in their demeanour, more than giving parents enough food. What he emphasized was not only affection; 5). Ziyou asked about the treatment of parents. The Master said, 6 3 "Filial sons nowadays are people who see to it that their parents get enough to eat. But even dogs and horses are cared for to that extent [ 5 ] . If there is no feeling of respect, wherein lies the difference?" (II-7, Waley p.89). ^mmm, TB, *tz&m*  &mmm.  mi&xm.  ®m&m.  *«, mm ¥ . CLY-HY p.2; LYZS vol.2, p.6) This passage shows that the mental aspect of filiality (such as jing ffc or respect) was distinguished from the physical aspect (yang ^ or nurture/support). Comparing this with the main connotation of filiality in the Western Zhou and Chunqiu bronze inscriptions (in which filiality means ritual expression to ancestors and elders), we can clearly see the innovative aspect of the Analects. That is, filiality in the Analects is something more mental or internalized than that in the bronze inscriptions. The idea of the distinction between the mental aspect and the physical one has the principal importance in the other documents related with the philosophy of filiality. Especially, it is noteworthy that the mental aspect of filiality is called jing IjJt or "respect" here, because the idea of "love (ai S ) and reverence (jing !&)", which is presented in the Book of Filiality, plays a crucial role in overcoming the contradiction between familial affection and political authority, as will be discussed in the next chapter. Indeed this concept seems to be not so sophisticated as in the Book of Filiality [ 6 ] , but we can learn that Confucius recognized filiality in essence as obedience to the authority of the father rather than mere affection to parents, as later thinkers who contributed to the philosophy of filiality did. This tendency is developed in the examples below; 6). Meng Wubo asked about the treatment of parents. The Master said, "Behave in such a way that your father and mother have no anxiety about you, except concerning your health". (II-6, Waley p.89) ^ f f £ f f l # o f 0 , IMMmZWo  (LY-HY p.2; LYZS vol.2, p.6) 6 4 7). The Master said, "It is always better for a man to know the age of his parents. In one case such knowledge will be a comfort to him; in the other, it will fill with a salutary dread". (IV-21, Waley p. 106} ^ a , £ # £ ¥ , ^nr^2nm., -mzim,  -muffio  CLY-HY P.7; LYZS vol.4, p. 16) There are different opinions about how to read Example 6) t7] , but we can interpret the import of the saying like this: Parents will be always anxious about their children, so the children should behave to reassure their parents and also should always be anxious, as is asserted in Example 7). In other words, a son must guess his parents' feeling spontaneously and, aiming at their complete contentment, control his own conduct. Though there is no help for destiny beyond his will and control, all his conduct should be regulated by affection toward his parents. This self-regulation is limitless because feeling is invisible at the first place; a son cannot do as he likes even if he knows that his parents do not worry. His affection to parents creates in his mind a fear that his trivial conduct possibly makes them worry, which chains him to good behavior. Thus, filiality is a spirit anxious for the contentment of parents. We would like to give the name of "affectionism" to this spirit in which affection to parents is the basis for all conduct. Example 6) has already suggested that a son's free will is not evaluated, and this tendency is fully developed in the following famous episode: 8). When Master Zeng was ill he summoned his disciples and said, "Free my feet, free my hands. The Songs says; In fear and trembling, With caution and care, As though on the brink of a chasm, As though treading thin ice. But I know that I am exonerated (from fear) after now, my little 6 5 ones". (VIII-3, Waley p. 132) MM*. I f f f^M^ "BM&'h^o  (LY-HY p.14; LYZS vol.8, p.30) This is usually said to be an episode at the death of Zeng Can [8] though Masao Munajiri has expressed doubts about this [9] . No matter whether this is a real story or not, at least it seems written about his death. Now, why did Zeng Can order them to free his feet and hands? According to commentaries, it is to show his disciples that his feet and hands were not injured at all, because it is filial piety not to hurt one-self [ 1 0 ] . But this episode does not refer to the word xiao # , so it is difficult to decide that the reference to his feet and hands is related to filiality. What we can say is, at least, that Zeng Can tries to confirm, in front of his disciples, that he has never been self-destructive. The reason that he cites the ode is to show his carefulness so as not to hurt himself during his lifetime; he has lived his life "in fear and trembling, with caution and care, as though on the brink of a chasm, as though treading thin ice," because he valued preserving one's body in a good condition. We consider next the reason why it is important to preserve one's body in a good condition. The concept that one's body should not be hurt in any way is most typically seen an episode in the "Meaning of Rites (Jiyi Ijlji)" chapter of the Book of Rites; The disciple Lezheng Zichun injured his foot in descending from his hall, and for some months was not able to go out. Even after this he still wore a look of sorrow, and [one of the) disciples of the school said to him, "Your foot, master, is better; and though for some months you could not go out, why should you still wear a look of sorrow?" Lezheng Zichun replied, "It is a good question which you ask! It is a good question you ask! I heard from Zengzi what he heard the Master say, that of all that Heaven produces and Earth 6 6 nourishes, there is none [so] great (as) man [ 11 ] . His parents give birth to his person all complete, and to return it to them all complete may be called filial duty. When no member has been mutilated and no disgrace done to any part of the person, it may be called complete; and hence a superior does not dare to take the slightest step in forgetfulness of his filial duty. But now I had forgotten the way of that, and therefore I wear a look of sorrow. [Legge 1885, vol.2, p.228) mjE^mr^mmn&, ma^m. ms&> TOTB, *^£je$&. m %*m* «*&> Mtko mm^ms, mmmzm&o  mmmzmfc.  nm m®?. n^mm^^, s. ^±m*k,  wzmm.  MA%>±<,  stm&m&z* T^mmz. nrii#^0 ^«^n, *#£#, »rai££. %cm?m&m%im £#M&. ^ & # £ i l £ > M & M & 1 & . CLJZS vol.48, p.371) This episode, which will be discussed in Chapter Four of this disser-tation, presents an idea similar to that of Example 8). According to this, filiality requires one to preserve his body in a good condition, because he owes his body to his parents, that is because "one's body is his parents' body transmitted to him ^ ^ f ^ ^ j S ^ H f e " CThe chapter on the "Great Filiality" in the Dadai Liji ^HScHfB, vol.4, p.9). The same idea can be found in the Book of Filiality, where it says, "Seeing that our body, with hair and skin, is derived from our parents, we should not allow it to be injured in any way. This is the beginning of filiality # mmm, § £ £ # , « M > #£#}-&" CMakra p.3). As Du Weiming has suggested, this idea "must not be taken as literally to mean the contunuity of a biological line" (1985, p. 119). What this idea expresses is that parents can survive after death not only in their child's memory but also in his physical body, because one owes his whole existence to his parents. As Feng Youlan puts it, pre-serving one's own self is "to perpetuate his parents' lives" (Feng 1934, p.433). Since a son owes even his body to them, he has no private possessions to be at his disposal, and he is not allowed to be so self-indulgent as to be destructive to both his body and his moral character. He cannot escape from his parents or their authority, because their image is internalized; even his body symbolizes their authority. There is no more effective doctrine than this to remind him of the impossi-bility of escaping from their authority. Only when one completes his filial duty at death, he is liberated from it. This statement of Zengzi shows his satisfaction, self-confidence and relief. We can think that parents are recognized here to symbolize the source of existence, and, in spite of an individual's death, one can acquire eternity by being filial, that is, by preserving the source of existence, as Nobuyuki Kaji suggests (1962-2, p.65). In short, the Analects succeeds in grasping the essence of filiality, which is obedience to parental authority, and admits that human beings are submissive to the Absolute symbolized by parents. The same idea can be seen in the next examples of the Analects: 9). The Master said, "While father and mother are alive, a good son does not wander afield; or if he does so, goes only where he has said he was going". (IV-19, Waley p. 105) ^ B , £ # & . ^ M , j l & W ^ o (LY-HY p.7; LYZS vol.4, p.15) 10). Zilu asked, "When one hears a maxim, should one at once seek occasion to put it into practice?" The Master said, "Your father and elder brother are alive. How can you whenever you hear a maxim at once put it into practice?" (XI-21, Waley p. 157) ?&m. HHBffrtt. ^ H , #£5E£ , mZ®,  £H»ff?£. (LY-HY P.2i; LYZS vol.11, p.44) 11). The Master said, "Min Ziqian is indeed a very good son. No one speaks ill of his parents and brothers." (XI-5, Waley p. 153) ^ E L # m , S f t . A ^ [ 1 2 ] 5 . m ^ ^ « M ^ ^ S o (LY-HY p.20; LYZS vol.11, p.42) 6 8 12). (Fan Chi) said, "May I venture to ask about 'deciding when in two minds'? " The Master said, "An excellent question. Because of a morning's blind rage, to forget one's own safety and even endanger one's kith and kin' is not a case of divided mind?" (XII-21, Waley p. 168) mmm, mm  — mm.  ^ B . mm,  m* — - a ^ a , &«#> & R&M, « H o (LY-HY p.24; LYZS vol.12, p.48) Huang Kan JE^SI [487-545) explains that in Example 9) a filial son does so lest he should make his parents worry (Lunyu Yishu vol.2 p.31). According to He Yan's MH Collective Glosses (ed. in the early third century) and the Lunyu Zhushu im j^3:®H (ed. in 999) on Example 11), there is no one speaking ill of his parents when he is filial (LYZS vol.11 p .42) [ 1 3 ] , but this does not make clear the reason why one can be called a filial son when his parents are not spoken ill of. Liu Baonan (1791-1855) interprets this as that a filial son remonstrates with his parents on their wrong behavior so as not to have them censured (LYZY vol.14, p .239) [ 1 4 ] . His reading is possible because the idea of remon-strance is seen in the Analects, but we can understand this sentence better as meaning that the son behaves so as not to have parents blamed; if a son acts against social or political regulations, it would not only put him in a dangerous situation but also cause a trouble for his parents. His personal excessive feelings or behavior are prohibited because they may be injurious to his parents as well as himself, as shown in Example 12). If he lives up to the ethics of filiality at all he should follow regulations and ethics carefully; if he is affectionate toward his parents at all he should behave in moderation. Thus, familial affection is shifted to obedience to social norms, and arbitrariness is disapproved. A son should not do anything self-willedly, even though the result of his decision might be good; he has to take his parents' opinion into consideration before he decides, as is shown in Example 10). Filiality requires making it a criterion of behavior to do parents good; Min Ziqian is filial because he succeeds in this. We do not have to think that this idea of obedience to parental authority was invented by the Confucian school. The essence of filiality is always the recognition of one's owing his whole existence to one's parents. As has been discussed, filiality in the Western Zhou period was obedience to authority as the heart of a patrilineal descent group, or society itself, which was symbolized by fatherhood. In this sense, filiality since the beginning was always the negation of personal autonomy. Changes after the Chunqiu period should be sought for not in any essential change of its meaning but in what symbolized "authority". That is, we have seen that there was a general tendency to limit the scope of filiality in Chunqiu bronze inscriptions and the Zuozhuan. The Analects seems to assume filiality based on lineage structure, but makes the authority that filiality symbolizes something more general and abstract, or an internalized image of parents, something like con-science. In other words, this book succeeded in changing filiality, which used to work only in lineage structures, into an ethic adaptable to all people in a society not based on lineage structure. Therefore, it is quite understandable that this idea was adopted by later thinkers such as Mencius, and developed in such books as the Book of Rites, the Dadai Li.ji and the Book of Filiality. It is reasonable to expect that this attribute of filiality would produce a conservative and obedient mentality, lacking the adventurous spirit and confined to one's own family. At the same time, it sanctions the autonomy and exclusiveness of a family. Did this kind of idea look attractive to people living in transitional periods? Since the lineage system had abdicated its central position in society, it is hardly believable that filiality became adaptable to the whole society merely by being generalized. Furthermore, its obedient mentality would have 7 0 been favorable to monarchy, but the autonomy of the family was not. These are the problems about the relation between filiality and society or government; did Confucius admit that filial affection contradicted social and governmental authority, or, if not, how did he think filial-ity was extended into more general ethics? Indeed, society and govern-ment were not separate issues in ancient Chinese philosophy, but so far studies about filiality have tended to concentrate on its political aspects (for example, Itano 1955). These two should be dealt with as two main motifs in the discussion of filiality, because the concept of society was related to social norms belonging to the category of li iff or rites in a wide sense, which was also an extremely important theme in ancient Chinese philosophy. Considering the social aspect, we cannot but admit that the Analects rarely discusses conflicts between filial feelings and social norms. The Analects does not discuss what one should do when he is caught between filial affection and governmental loyalty, which is an important topic in the Mencius. The only exception is an episode found in Chapter Thirteen, which will be discussed later (Example 28, See p.81). In this episode the Duke of She praises a person witnessing against his father who steals a sheep. Concluding this person not to be "straight", Confucius shows that any behavior against familial affection is anti-social. Thus, the Analects tends to conclude that the direct expression of familial affection equals social justice. Naturally, the Analects discusses the relation between filial feeling and social justice. But when it does, the discussion always concentrates on the Rites. That is, discussion about the relation between filial feeling and social justice tends to be the discussion about how the feeling should be expressed in regulated behavior based on the rites. For example, the sentences below show that what is expressed C= filial affection) coincides, or should coincide, with the socially recognized mode of expressing affection (= the rites). 13). Meng Yizi asked about the treatment of parents. The Master said, "Never disobey". (Fan) Chi said, "In what sense did you mean it?" The Master said, "While they (= parents) are alive, serve them according to rites. When they die, bury them according to rites and sacrifice to them according to rites." [II-5, Waley p.88) s«^ra#. ^s , &&. — 10, Graft, ^EK trnzum.  nm. H i t , H££*iSo CLY-HY p.2; LYZS vol.2, p.6) This passage suggests that filiality should be expressed principally in ritual activities. This idea resembles the idea of the Western Zhou period, because we have found in the bronze inscriptions that filiality means ancestral sacrifices. Filiality in the bronze inscriptions is to express obedience to lineage headship in regulated forms of ritual, which are nothing but the rites. Furthermore, as we have discussed, filiality in the bronze inscriptions is the ethics of the living toward both their parents and ancestors, which are the symbol of headship, and this is exactly what Example 13) tries to assert. Indeed it is certain that the early Confucianists tried to make filiality more internalized by emphasizing its mental aspect, but it seems that they did not succeed in ethicizing filiality enough to realize the conflicts between its mental aspect (filial affection) and its formal aspect (the rites as the expression of affection) u 5] . In the Mencius, the idea of equating filiality with the rites is not prominent; Mencius, who developed the early Confucian ideas of filiality, emphasized one's internal affection for his parents more than observing the prescriptions of the rites. Though he did not ignore the importance of the rites, priority was given to expressing filial affection to a maximum. Occasionally, the Analects seems to admit the opposition of filial affection against behavioral norms, as the following example shows: 14). Lin Fang asked about the basis of the rites. The Master said, 7 2 "A noble question indeed! With the rites, it is better (to err) on the side of frugality than on the side of extravagance; in mourning, it is better (to err) on the side of grief than on the side of formality1161." (III-4, Lau 1983, p. 19) (LY-HY p.4; LYZS vol.3, p. 10) Indeed, this looks similar to some ideas found in the Mencius concerning the superiority of internal feelings to external formality. But, as the Lunyu Zhushu Iraq^O;!^ clearly explains [17] , this statement by Confucius does not assert that one can think light of formality if he only grieves in mourning rites; both "formality" (yi JS) and "excessive grief" (gi JB&) are undesirable. However, if one is in a situation in which he has to choose one of them, "excessive grief" is a little better than "formality". Therefore, the appropriate attitude in a mourning rite, which is an expression of one's filiality, is the well balanced co-existence of filial feelings and formality of the Rites. This is clearly different from Mencius, who tends to think of the formality of rites as something like natural obstacles. The superiority of formality to feelings is shown as well in the next example, though here it is not related to filiality; 15). When Yan Hui died, his father Yan Lu begged for the Master's carriage, that he might use it to make the enclosure for the coffin. The Master said, "Gifted or not gifted, you have spoken of your son and I will now speak of mine. When my son, Li, died, he had a coffin, but no enclosure. (XI-8, Waley p. 154) M f t l ^ o (LY-HY p.20; LYZS vol.11, p.42) Yan Hui, who died young, was Confucius' favorite disciple. Confucius admits the affection of his father to be understandable but denies an enclosure for Yan Hui, because according to proper rites one who cannot 7^3 afford an enclosure should not have one [Lunyu Yishu vol.6 p .4 ) u . This episode is rather similar to the thought of Xun Cling because it shows that the formality of rites should be kept regardless of the grade of affection. Thinkers who admitted the conflict between filial affection and social justice, such as Mencius or Xun Cling, emphasized the concept of remonstrance by a son with his parents. The Analects notes this as well; 16). The Master said, "In serving his father and mother a man may gently remonstrate with them. But if he sees that he has failed to change their opinion, he should resume an attitude of deference and not thwart them; he may feel discouraged, but not resentful." (IV-18, Waley p. 105) ^ H , mstn&m*  J i ^ t ^ xm^fm,  mm*®*  CLY-HY P.7; LYZS vol.4, p. 15) But this sounds faint, compared to Mencius, who says that a son should run away carrying his parents on his back if they are criminal in spite of his remonstrance1191 , and Xun Cling, who affirms that following not father but the Way is great conduct, while being filial is small conduct [ 2 0 ] . (To be discussed later.) The Analects emphasizes not the superiority of social norms but the autonomy and exclusiveness of a family. If the Analects does not admit conflict between filiality and social justice or the formality of the rites, what does the relation between them mean in this book ? As we will see later, Mencius thinks that the rites share their roots with filial affection but the former are in a inferior position because the latter is nearer to the root: human good-ness. For Xun Cling, the rites are what controls internal feelings so as not to permit them to be destructive. In the Analects, the ideal is harmony between filial affection and formality. The meaning of the rites based on filiality is demonstrated in the following examples, related to T 4 the "three years' mourning": 17). Zai Wo asked about the three years' mourning period, saying "Even a year is too long. If the gentleman gives up the practice of the rites for three years, the rites are sure to be in ruins; if he gives up the practice of music for three years, music is sure to collapse. [In the course of a year,) the old grain having been used up, the new grain ripens, and fire is renewed by fresh drilling. A full year's (mourning) is quite enough1 2 1 1 ." The Master said, "Would you, then, (after a year) feel at ease in eating your rice and wearing your finery?" (Zai Wo said,) "Quite at ea se [ 2 2 ] . " "If you would really feel at ease, then do so. The gentleman in mourning finds no relish in good food, no pleasure in music, and no comforts in his own home. That is why he does not eat his rice and wear his finery. Since you feel at ease, then do so." After Zai Wo had left, the Master said, "How inhuman Yu (= addressing name of Zai Wo) is! A child ceases to be nursed by its parents only when it is three years old. Three years' mourning is observed everywhere under Heaven. Was Yu not given three years' love by his parents?" (XVII-21, Lau 1983, p. 179, Waley p.214) ma mmmu, mmmn. »«&*, M^B&O  ^ B , &=tm.  #*«, » ftMXmzmo * H ^ ± H , ^T£jI3!tilo ^H&, I H ^ ^ S ^ S X f f . (LY-HY p.36; LYZS vol.17, p.70) 18). Zizhang said, "When a knight is confronted with danger, he is ready to lay down his life. When he has the chance of gain, he thinks first of right. In sacrifices to ancestor he thinks of reverence and in mourning of grief. Only such a one can be (a knight)." (XIX-1, Waley p.224) 7 5 ^ 3 S H , ± i t s # , J I # & « , m&®.  S U B S , &»iu£ 0 CLY-HY P . 3 9 : LYZS vol.19, p.75) [ 2 3 ] 19). Ziyou said, "The ceremonies of mourning should be carried to the extreme that grief dictates, and no further." (XIX-14, Waley p.227) TmB. H & ¥ S W l t o CLY-HY p.40; LYZS vol.19, p.76) 20). Master Zeng said, "I once heard the Master say, 'Though a man may never before have shown all that is in him, he is certain to do so when mourning for a father or mother.'" (XIX-17, Waley p.227) # ^ 0 , ^ g U t v ^ A ^ S M ^ M § i * ¥ 0 CLY-HY p.40; LYZS vol.19, p.76) It is a matter of course for grief to be felt in mourning for parents. But why is it only in mourning that one "shows all that is in him" the extreme point of human feelings? According to the last sentence of Example 17, the three years' mourning is carried out because one is deeply affected by his parents; in other words, it is a symbolic expression of his owing his whole existence to his parents. It is the only time in which he, deprived of all his social attributes, meets his raw feelings and the absolute root of his existence. Otherwise, we would not be able to understand the reason Confucius said "if you would really feel at ease then do so" in Example 17 and the reason Ziyou said "no further" in Example 19. The three year's mourning was significant for Confucius, because of its psychological function rather than the social functions related to lineage solidarity or matrimonial bonds. Because mourning is the symbol of representing one's dependence on the authority of his parents, his personality can be judged by his observance of the three years' mourning; 21). The Master said, "Observe what a man has in mind to do when his father is living, and then observe what he does when his father is dead. If, for three years, he makes no changes to his father's ways, 7 6 he can be said to be a filial son." (1-11, Lau 1983, p.5) ^ 0 . £ £ « £ £ , £ « * £ f r . =^m&mXZM,  *JBii#£o CLY-HY p.l ; LYZS vol.1, p.2) 22). Master Zeng said, "I have heard the Master say that other men could emulate everything Meng Zhuangzi did as a good son with the exception of one thing; he left unchanged both in his father's officials and his father's policies, and this was what was difficult to emulate." (XIX-18, Lau,1979, p.195) #^B, umm^o  M^£#m, &m»im&,  n^&xz&mxzm, &M$£fco [LY-HY p.40; LYZS vol.19, p.76) The meaning of "see his intention" is to judge someone's personality by his action. At his parents' death, mourning represents his personality. By that ritual behavior he expresses that he is not autonomous but obedient to his parents. Ancestral sacrifices are defined as the expression of reverence, in the same way that mourning is defined as an expression of grief. They are important not for the spirits of the dead but for representing internal filial feeling. 23). Of the saying, "The word 'sacrifice' is like the word 'presence'; one should sacrifice to a spirit as though that spirit were present". The Master said, "If I am not present a t the sacrifice, it is as though there were no sacrifice." (111-12, Waley P-97) H#Dft, H##n#ffio ^ 0 , W * & , W H o CLY-HY p.4; LYZS vol.3, P.H) The essence of ancestral rites is to respectfully serve forebears as one has done when his parents are alive. This leads to the conclusion that he is not contented when he cannot attend, though the use of a sub-stitute is permitted by the Rites. From the above discussion, we can realize that the early Confucian school idealized the Rites, which corresponds to the generalization of filiality in this school; rituals are made meaningful and valuable as symbolic expression of filial affection. This explanation was also followed by Mencius, but in the Analects there is no contradiction between feeling Cthe symbolized) and the rites [symbol), contrary to Mencius, who put much stress on the symbolized. This stress perhaps reflects social changes in the late Chunqiu to early Zhanguo periods. When lineage system gradually lost its central position in society, the early Confucian school succeeded in re-interpreting filiality as obedience to the more generalized and internalized image of parents. Likewise, the rites related to filiality were re-interpreted from being a symbol of lineage authority to one of obedience and affection to parents. The Confucian school developed a new ritual to represent the latter: the three years' mourning. As Takayuki Tanida has already discussed, the three years' mourning was not a classical method originating in the mourning ritual of the Western Zhou period, but was first advocated by the Confucian school (Tanida 1966, p .38) [ 2 4 ] . Finally, we have to discuss the relation between filiality and government. The spirit of filiality is asserted to be a basic principle for government in these examples; 24). Master You said, "It is rare for a man whose character is such that he is filial (as a son) and obedient (as a younger brother) to have the inclination to transgress against his superiors; it is un-heard of for one who has no inclination to transgress against his superiors to start a rebellion. The gentleman devotes his efforts to the roots, for once the roots are established, the Way will grow therefrom. Being filial as a son and obedient as a younger brother is, perhaps, the root of humanity. (1-2, Lau 1983, p.3) tilo m=f-m^o  * M i i £ o # & • & # , « ^ t ^ * H o CLY-HY p.l; LYZS 7 8 vol.1, p.l) 25). Someone, when talking to Master Kong, said, "Why do you not take part in government?" The Master says, "The Book says, 'Be filial, only be filial and friendly towards your brothers, and you will be contributing to government.' In so doing, a man is, in fact, taking part in government. Why does he have (actively) to take part in government." (11-21, Waley p.92, Lau 1983, p . l7 ) [ 2 5 ] J&BIE^EK f i ^ ^ S t . ^EK m^k,  # « # , £^5EH^ M&ftm,  & « i & 0 H » & $ o (LY-HY p.3, LYZS vol.2, p.7) Example 24 seems to equate filiality with humanity, which is a charac-teristic idea of Mencius. Indeed, Example 24 is similar to the idea of "government by filiality" which is also prominent in the Mencius and the Book of Filiality, the idea that the Son of Heaven should govern the world based on the spirit of filiality that is nothing but respectful-ness to human beings. But, on more careful observation, we find a different tone. The logic of Master You can be viewed as; first, it is difficult to conceive of a filial son who resists the authority of his superiors because filiality is obedience to the authority of parents. (But that is not impossible, and a filial son might resist his superiors, following his parents. This is proved by the fact that Master You says not "never" but "rare".) Second, it is impossible for one who does not resist his superiors to rebel. Third, on the other hand, when "the roots" are established, "the Way" grows. Finally, it is concluded that filiality and deference are the root of humanity. "The root" indicates filiality and deference, and "the Way" indicates humanity. But it is still unclear how "the Way (of humanity) grows". According to the Lunyu Zhengyi iJmiwjEH (published in 1866), "the Way" means the categories (or relationships) on which government is based, as monarch-retainer, father-son, husband-wife or friends (LYZY vol.1, p .4 ) [ z 6 ] . If so, the meaning of "the Way" corresponds with the concept of order, that is, political and social order. The meaning of this sentence will be quite clear if it is read as "when the root (=filiality) is laid down, the order of society is established". This interpretation shows that this passage states the mere first step to government; a filial son, who may make a rebellion, can be led to humanity, but a unfilial son is hope-less. After all, as shown in Example 25, anybody can contribute to government by being filial. There are some examples suggesting "government by filiality" though their actual connotations are not clear; 26). Master Zeng said, "Conduct the funeral of your parents with meticulous care and let not sacrifices to your remote ancestors be forgotten, and the virtue of the common people will incline towards fullness." (1-9, Lau 1979, p.5) # ^ 0 > £ * $ & & K i i l ^ . CLY-HY p.l, LYZS vol.1, p.2) 27). Ji Kangzi asked whether there were any form of encouragement by which he could induce the common people to be respectful and loyal. The Master said, "Approach them with dignity and they will respect you. Show piety toward your parents and kindness to your children and they will be loyal to you. Promote those who are worthy, train those who are incompetent; that is the best form of encouragement." (11-20, Waley p.92) WL^f&mWlo (LY-HY p.3, LYZS vol.2, p.7) According to these examples, if a monarch himself is an ideal son and an ideal father, his influence can mold an obedient mentality in the people. Though the mechanism of influence is not explicitly discussed, it may be through ritual expression, because Example 26 refers to funeral and ancestral rites [ 2 7 ] . The political function of filiality is faint, compared with the Mencius which asserts that a monarch should govern by the spirit of filiality. S O However, what is the most important about the relation between filiality and government in the Analects is an episode showing a contradiction between them. 28). The Governor of She said to Confucius, "In our village we have Can example of) a straight person. When the father stole a sheep, the son gave evidence against him." Confucius answered, "In our village those who are straight are quite diflFerent. Fathers cover up for their sons, and sons cover up for their fathers. In such behavior is straightness to be found as a matter of course." [XIII-18, Lau 1983, p. 127) # , » J § : > %%>^m..  ^ f c £ I S , * & £ * £ . (LY-HY p.26, LYZS vol.13, p.51) This idea is not found in elsewhere of the Analects, but is quite important because this episode appears in many other books, such as the Hanfeizi (the later third century B.C.E.), the Liishi Chunqiu (ed. in 241 B.C.E.), the Zhuangzi (the later fourth to third century B.C.E.?) and the Huainanzi (presented to the Throne in 139 B.C.E.), with considerable variation in detail, which Shigehiko Uno has discussed (Uno 1980). In addition, this is the first discussion of friction between the exclusiveness of a family and the authority of monarchal government, as Chohachi Itano has discussed (Itano 1955, p. 12). In the Western Zhou period when lineage principles corresponded with governmental principles, the authority of lineage was that of society and the power of dynastic government was based on it. The gradual collapse of lineage system in the Chunqiu to Zhanguo periods was accompanied by the rise of another type of authority: the authority of absolute and monistic despotism, while the old authority became restricted inside a family. In this context discussions arose about whether government transcended the authority of parents enough to deny the autonomy of a family, or whether S I parental authority had priority over that of government. Viewed in this context, the Analects clearly is on the side of the latter. Though it is right from the viewpoint of a ruler to accuse a criminal, it will be judged to be wrong if it contradicts familial feeling. In brief, it can be concluded that, while the discussion of filiality in the Analects had some innovative aspects, it also continued older ideas. The essence of filiality portrayed in this book depended on that of lineage society. The contradiction between filiality and social justice was not recognized explicitly. Concerning the friction between filiality and government, the recognition of which is indeed a contribution of this book, it supports the autonomy of the family. At the same time, the book opened the way to Mencius by internalizing the authority of parents and making filial affection superior to external behavior. (2) The ideas of filiality in the writings of Mencius Mencius (372-289 B.C.E.) was a philosopher who lived during the middle Zhanguo period. He is a very, probably the most, important figure in the history of the philosophy of filiality. He succeeded in shifting filiality to the basis of more general ethics. His ideas of filiality were accepted by the anonymous Confucians who wrote the Book of Filiality and related documents. (Chronological relationships between the Mencius and other documents will be discussed in Chapter Four of this dissertation.) This does not mean, however, that Mencius completed the philosophy of filiality. Precisely speaking, his ideas of filiality were biased by his own world-view and his historical background, and this bias did not necessarily fit the historical trends of his times. Writers who discussed filiality after his death had to exert a fair amount of effort to adapt the philosophy of filiality to their 8 2 historical conditions. What we will do in this section, therefore, is to grasp the features of Mencius' ideas of filiality in comparison with those of the preceding books [such as the Analects) and the later ones [such as the Book of Filiality). For this purpose it may be helpful to introduce Mencius' philosophical background. According to the Shiji 5&Btl, Mencius was trained by a disciple of Zisi ^ S , that is Kong Ji ?L$fc [483-402 B. C.E.), a grandson of Confucius [vol.74, p.2343). Kong Ji was influenced by Zeng Can # # [c. 505-435 B.C.E.), as Naoki Kano has discussed [1953 p. 137). According to Yoshio Takeuchi, the Confucian school after the death of Confucius was divided into two schools: the school of Zeng Can and the school of Ziyou ^p$£ [Yan Yan gffll, c. 506-? B.C.E.). The ideas of the former were characterized by a stress on the mental aspect of morality, especially humanity, sincerity and filiality, while the latter stressed behavioral criteria for justice such as the rites [1978 vol.8, p.26-33). Because Mencius belonged to the philosophical tradition derived from Zeng Can, we might expect that his teaching about filiality put more stress on the affection of father-child relations. Next, as is well known, Mencius' thought is characterized by his emphasis on the innate goodness of human nature [xing ft). He does not mean that human inclinations do not include such desires as to lead us to vice, but morality, which is more basic in human nature, spontaneous-ly grows as far as it is properly nourished [Graham 1990, p.27-40). What is important for our present discussion is that Mencius discusses filiality from this point of view; filiality or the ethics of parent-child relations is based on this goodness. As Ames asserts, in Mencius' theory, human nature is the dynamic process in which one gradually develops his inclinations in his relationships to others [Ames 1991, p. 155), and filial affection is one of the most basic inclinations represented in a familial context, as his following statement shows: S 3 What a man is able to do without having to learn it is what he can truly do; what he knows without having to reflect on it is what he truly knows. There are no young children who do not know loving their parents, and none of them when they grow up will not know respecting their brothers. Loving one's parents is benevolence [= humanity); respecting one's elders is Tightness. [Vila-15, Lau 1984, p.269) *Dg««, R&M&.  m*mwMR&o  mm,  tm. am, ma. CMZ-HY p.51, MZZS vol. 13a, p. 101) Filiality can be developed into humanity spontaniously in the normal process of socialization. In one of the most famous and basic chapters of the book in his name, he also says; No man is devoid of a heart sensitive to the suffering of others. My reason for saying that no man is devoid of a heart sensitive to the others is this. Suppose a man were, all of a sudden, to see a young child on the verge of falling into a well. He would certainly be moved to compassion, not because he wanted to get in the good grace of the parents, nor because he wished to win the praise of his fellow villagers or friends, nor yet because he dis-liked the cry of the child. From this it can be seen that whoever is devoid of the heart of compassion is not human, whoever is devoid of the heart of shame is not human, whoever is devoid of courtesy and modesty is not human, and whoever is devoid of the heart of right and wrong is not human. The heart of compassion is the beginning point of benevolence; the heart of shame, of dutifulness; the heart of courtesy and modesty, of observance of the rites; the heart of right and wrong, of wisdom. Man has these four beginning points just as he has four limbs. If a man possessing these four beginning points is able to develop all of them, it will be like a fire 8 4 starting up or spring coming through. When these are fully developed, he can tend the whole realm within the Four Seas, but if fails to develop them, he will not be able even to serve his parents. (IIa-6, Lau 1984, p.67) mnmmm&o s^«£ , *s«B£4^ #AmD mmmzfo*  #A&.  mm mzfo* #A-tfeo &%&£&*  #A-t&o « B ^ ^ , t^anfe. mmzfo*  m 2.Mfco mn2.fo.  «l±*-t&. &&£*>*  ®£*1fi. A£MB9*1&, MR Mo mt&%±.  fcUUmm.  € ^ * » * J £ # * £ # . (MZ-HY p. 12, MZZS vol.3-2, p.26) Those who do not develop their "four starting points" derived from "a heart sensitive to the suffering of others" cannot serve their parents but those who do can "tend the whole realm within the Four Seas". That is, both filial piety and government should be based on one thing: the goodness of the human mind by nature. He also says in other chapters; The substance of humanity is the serving of one's parents; the substance of Tightness is obedience to one's elder brothers. (IVa-27, Lau 1984, p. 157) fc£*> ^ K f i - f i . B2.9.  « J i t e o [MZ-HY p.29, MZZS vol.7-b, p.59) A gentleman is sparing with living creatures but shows no benevo-lence towards them; he shows benevolence towards the people but is not attached to them. He is attached to his parents but is merely benevolent towards the people; he is benevolent towards the people but is merely sparing with living creatures. (VIIa-45, Lau 1984, p.285) %}„ (MZ-HY p.54, MZZS vol.l3-b, p.107) Concerning the latter example, which is also very famous, the commentary 8 5 of Zhao Qi ffiK (c. 110-201 C.E.) says, "To be affectionate to his relatives first, then to be lovingly disposed towards people and then to be kind to creatures; this is the order of benevolence. ifcM3£Mf$L*  f$$k t S , 2*^g$f , fflM£#-tfio " CMZZS vol.l3-b, p.107), that is, he thinks that this chapter shows the priority of kin to other people and of human beings to other creatures. Zhu Xi ^ ^ (1130-1200) thinks that "sparing [ai U)"» "benevolence [ren {H)" and "being attached Cflin j | ) " are the basically the same mentality, but its forms are different according to different objects CMengzi Jizhu Ifc^MQ.  vol.13, p .363) [ 2 8 ] . Both commentaries are instructive, and this passage should be interpreted as meaning that the basis is affection to parents, which becomes philan-thropic love when it is developed to the level of people in general. When it is developed to everything beyond the human sphere it becomes kindness. Therefore, Mencius, contrary to Mozi, thinks it natural for one to have the most close feelings for his family, and that humanity is defined or identified with filiality, and thus it becomes the absolute source of moral force. One can be a sage like such a legendary sovereign as Yao or Shun, only if he is filial and fraternal CVIb-2, Lau 1984, p .244) [ 2 9 ] . Thus, Mencius identifies filiality with the goodness of human nature. Then what does this goodness aim at concretely? In a word, it is the limitless pursuit of affection. He explains this by an example in which a really filial son is not loved by his parents. The ideal of filiality is "to yearn for his parents all his life ^^M5^M"  (Va-1, Lau p . l 79 ) [ 3 0 ] . To "yearn for" can be understood to mean "to love". This love to parents transcends everything; filiality does not depend on the sense of duties. It does not matter whether a son has discharged his moral or social duties beyond his family. The highest stage of filiality is to "please one's parents" and to get into entire accord with them; this affectionate harmony is superior even to "the Empire" (IVa-28, Lau 8 6 p . l57 ) [ 3 1 ] . Therefore, for being filial there is not an objective standard, but the limitless pursuit of invisible affection. If a filial son is not loved by his parents even though he has done everything he can, the only thing he can do is "complain and yearn at the same time ^§ Jltil". or in other words, deeply grieve over his destiny (Va-1, Lau p.178). Filiality in the Mencius can be characterized as "excessive affectionism", which is applied to not only parents but to other family members such as brothers. It is beyond our logical understanding that Shun was glad to welcome his younger brother Xiang, who earlier had tried to kill him; he even appointed the latter to the post of a lord (Va-2, Lau p. 181 and Va-3, Lau p . l83) C 3 2 ] . It is not natural at all that Shun was deceived by his brother, who pretended to be pleased when he saw Shun alive. The only way to understand him is to think that though Shun knew Xiang hated him, he loved his brother, so when Xiang came to say that he had been anxious about Shun, he was glad (in spite of what his brother had done to him), as Zhao Qi says, "Why did not Shun know that Xiang hated him? A humane person (= Shun) loved his brother and (wanted) to accord with him concerning both anxiety and pleasure. Since Xiang said that he was anxious about his superior (= Shun), he replied in an amicable way #fa&>F#I&3gEl&, £ A £ £ 3 $ , S S I & £ , & # M S , tfC&Mffi&st"  (MZZS vol.9a, p.70). The concept of familial ties in the Mencius can be defined as something like "the trans-logical and trans-ethical affectionate bond". It seems that Mencius saw only the affectionate aspect of filial and fraternal relations and disregarded their functional and social aspects. At least, attention is not paid to the fact that a parent-child relationship involves not only affection but is also a relation of a subordinate to authority. Filial piety for Mencius is a spirit aiming toward an ideal condition of affectionate harmony. A son disturbing this harmony is unfilial in a rigid sense, 8 7 even though his conduct is right, as Mencius shows to Kuang Zhang [Hlb-10, Lau p . l33 ) [ 3 3 ] . This point may reflect that the object of filiality is not lineage but families. It is not clear what kind of social group Mencius has in mind when he talks about filiality, but zongzu ^tfc  or lineage is not referred to. One chapter often cited in discussions of family structure in the Zhanguo period states that a large family includes nine persons and a smaller one five (Vb-2, Lau p .207) [ 3 4 ] . A family of five members seems similar to a nuclear family. When he says that "a man and woman living together is the most important of human relationships HicMiiL Avi^Cii&i&" CVa-2, Lau p.181), he shows his emphasis on the nuclear family. On the other hand, he also says that the neglect of one's parents through "partiality" toward one's wife is against filiality CIVb-30, Lau p . l73 ) [ 3 5 ] , and the word translated into "partiality" by Lau is si %^  or "private". It can be assumed that a husband and a wife [= a nuclear family) form a more "private" group, while a father and his children compose a more "public" family. If this assumption is right, it is quite probable that the "family" Mencius is thinking about is a household including old parents and their son/sons who has his/their own wife and children, that is, something like the "three generation system" (Kato, Joken 1940 p.572). This aspect of the Mencius is probably influenced by the progressive disruption of the lineage system far beyond the situation of the Analects. In spite of this different social focus, Mencius inherited a lot from the Analects, including the distinction between internal feeling and external formality, as well as "afFectionism". For example, in comparing the filial piety of Zeng Can # # with that of his son Yuan 7C, Mencius said that the former was solicitous of the wishes of his parents while the latter looked after their mouths and bellies CIVa-19, Lau p . l53 ) f 3 6 ] . The episode of Kuang Zhang g ^ , referred to before, is 8 8 also an interesting example because from it we learn that filiality has several steps. Kuang Zhang is mentioned in two places in this book; in one of them he is blamed for his unfiliality by a disciple of Mencius. According to the context, it is probable that he was hated and disowned by his father because of his remonstrance, but Mencius thought that he was filial because his affection to his father could be found out by his refusal to receive the service of his wife and sons (IVb-30, Lau p . l 73 ) [ 3 7 ] . In another place, however, Mencius blames Kuang Zhang for his misleading idea of Tightness CHIb-10, Lau p . l 33 ) [ 3 8 ] . From the viewpoint of ideal filial piety he is unfilial because he has disturbed affectionate harmony by his remonstrance. The form of unfiliality is less important for Mencius than its intention. We can see, therefore, that his concept of filiality had a three-fold structure; the highest was harmony, the middle level was affection and the lowest was to give support. This structure was obviously an elaborate version of the dichotomy in the Analects between mental filial piety and material service, and was influential in later discussions of this issue. Mencius also inherits from the Analects the idea that filiality is essentially to maintain oneself. He attributes the basis of all ethics to "the fulfillment of one's duty towards one's parents Cshi qin ^ H ) " and "watching over one's character [shou shen ^P#)", which are mutually related; one who cannot maintain himself is not filial and a filial son is somebody who controls himself (IVa-19, Lau p . l 5 3 ) [ 3 9 ] . Therefore, one should regulate his conduct according to his filial feeling for his parents. Because filiality means for a son to love his parents "to the end of his life" C H # S M Lau p.179), this internalized image of his parents will control him after the death of his parents. Mencius also shows that the internalized image of parents governs one forever in another passage [VIIb-36, Lau p .301) [ 4 0 ] , which says that Zeng Can could not eat jujubes, which was a favorite food of Zeng Can's father. 8 9 Explaining the reason why Zeng Can did not eat juj'ubes, Mencius says that it was because j'ujubes were "not shared by others 0f$§"- Lau's translation of this passage does not clarify its connotation, but according to Zhao Qi, Zeng Can is too filial to eat his father's favorite food, because it reminds him of his deceased father. His commentary says; The Rites do not prohibit (one from eating his parents' favorite foods, but) Zeng Can was a most filial son and he had special feeling in thinking about his parents; (because of) profound emotion caused by j'ujubes, he did not even taste them during his life time. Mencius praised him for this. mm^FM, ##s#, je«£'fr, ^mzm,  m%^fw.  s f i i . (Mengzi vol.14, p. 16) This will indicate that the excessive affectionism of Mencius tends to go beyond social norms in order to satisfy affection toward parents. It is convenient to begin with Mencius' political ideas about filiality in order to show that his affectionate filiality goes beyond social norms, because his teachings are so inclined to politics that the political attitudes and the social duty of an ordinary person are not distinguished. In the Mencius, filiality is political in two senses; on the one hand, every social ethic or political idea is based on the development of filiality and, on the other hand, filiality can reach its ideal level under good government. For example: Shun did everything that was possible to serve his parents, and succeeded, in the end, in pleasing the Blind Man (=Shun's father). Once the Blind Man was pleased, the Empire was transformed the pattern for the relationship between father and son in the Empire was set up. This is the supreme achievement of a dutiful son. (IVa-28, Lau p. 157) 9 0 5t, jtfc^BIA^o CMZ-HY p.30, MZZS vol.7b, p.59) The Empire has its basis in the state, the state in the family, and the family in one's own self. (IVa-5, Lau p. 141) 5 ^ T £ * f f i g , H ± # # £ » iC£*f f i#o CMZ-HY p.27, MZZS vol.7a, P-54) The Way [of harmonizing the Empire) lies at hand yet it is sought afar; the duty (of harmonizing the Empire) lies in the easy yet it is sought in the difficult [4 1] . If only everyone loved his parents and treated his elders with deference, the Empire would be at ease. CIVa-11, Lau p. 147) i iffiiI«§ijSo MEMMsJclflto A A S £ i l , « f t > M^T¥o (MZ-HY p.28, MZZS vol. 7b, p.57) Loving one's parents is benevolence (= humanity); respecting one's elders is Tightness. What is left to be done is simply the extension of these to the whole Empire, (Vila-15, Lau p.269) M , £ 1 6 . « g , Hfe . iHffi, fe^T-t&o CMZ-HY p.51, MZZS vol.l3a, p.101) All of these passages convey the same idea: filiality as familial ethics should be extended beyond the family and should be adopted as the basic principle for ideal government. Not only should administrators develop their spirit of filiality to "win the confidence of his superiors Hi^-k" (IVa-12, Lau p. 149), but a monarch should also govern the people through his spirit of filiality. A monarch such as King Hui of Liang, who "herded the young men he loved to their death H ^ 3 ? S ^ ^ I ^ ^ | ^ " to win a battle caused by his desire for more territory, was "ruthless ^{H" in his administration, because he "extended his ruthlessness from those he did not love to those he loved. MMfft^fM&MWt^&o "  CVIIb-1, Lau p .287) [ 4 2 ] . In addition, ideal government is not only attained through filial piety but also is able to make the people filial. Good government should include teaching people filial piety, fraternity, sincerity and truthfulness; contrary to that, bad government deprives them of the economic basis for filiality (Ia-5, Lau p.5)C 4 3 ] . We can see that two kinds of filiality are distinguished here: a low level of filiality existing naturally in the people and a higher level of filiality which should be promoted by government, probably for its stabilization. In other words, Mencius realizes that the spirit of filiality is effective both for monarchical power and the harmony of society. The basic difference between Mencius* political interpretation of filiality and that of the Analects lies in the idea of government by filiality. In the Analects, filiality is the starting point of other ethics, and the mentality of filiality is useful for government. Mencius expands on this. But because of his excessive afFectionism and the identification of filiality with humanity, he thinks filiality is every-thing. It is not only a starting point but also a goal. Thus, he over-comes in his way the contradiction between filiality and government. As a result, Mencius makes filiality superior to government, and the family superior to the monarch. This means that the autonomy and exclusiveness of family bonds transcend monarchical government. When he was asked what Shun, the model of a perfectly filial son, should have done when his father was a criminal, he answered that Shun should have run away with his father on his back to live together harmoniously with him (VIIa-35, Lau p.279) [ 4 4 ] . This episode tells us that filial affection does not deny law, but transcends it. Mencius does not mean that the former can disturb the social order, but admits familial bonds are too close for public power to interfere. In another place he asserts that kinship relations are so superior to the power of a monarch that his relatives are qualified to dethrone him (Vb-9, Lau p.219) [ 4 5 1 . This is related to Mencius' theory of the right to dispose unfit rulers (Ib-8 Lau p.38) [46] , but it is difficult to deny his view of the throne as 9 2 shared by relatives was out of fashion in the time when absolute centralized government began to appear. We can see the same tendency in another chapter, which advocates the importance of "ministers whose families have served it (=the government) for generations ifir^ S" (Ib-7, Lau p.37)C 4 7 ] . This problem — the conflict between "loving one's relatives IS 18" and "advancing the wise xitjl?" — was a big issue in political thought during the Zhanguo period (Itano 1955, p. 10). Since Mencius emphasizes the superiority of family bonds, he is inclined to the former, though he speaks of the importance of the latter in other places CLau p.63-67, IIa-4 and 5 ) [ 4 8 ] . Needless to say, the trend of history was moving away from his ideals; when centralized government and bureaucracy developed, kinship became less significant. Can we say that all of Mencius' theories about filiality were conservative or reactionary from the viewpoint of the historical trends of his time? The exclusiveness of the family which he advocated was not supported by such a later scholars as Xun Qing or Hanfeizi [49] , for whom the contradiction between filiality and government was to be overcome not by the absolute superiority of the former but by accord between these two. But what should not be forgotten is that many of Mencius' ideas are found in other books including the Book of Filiality. It is possible to think that Mencius prepared some of the theoretical basis for the philosophy of filiality. First, the idea of filiality as the most basic and highest principle for government, the idea Mencius strongly advocated, is also the principal issue in the Book of Filiality. Not only in the Book of Filiality, but during the whole remaining history of China filiality has been the highest principle or, at least, one of the highest principles. It can be said that this is the result of the important contribution of Mencius. Secondly, the affectionism of filiality sanctions the concept of &3 remonstrance. Mencius does not condone "taxing father and son over a moral issue 3£-?^MW"  because familial affection is superior to social Tightness [rVb-30, Lau p. 173; UIb-10, Lau p . l 3 3 ) t 6 0 ] . But at the same time a filial son who really loves his parents will remonstrate with them when he thinks that their conduct will bring fatal results; if he does otherwise, he is thought to be indifferent to them [VIb-3, Lau p . 2 4 5 ) [ s U . The concept of remonstrance is important in the philosophy of filiality, because it is able to reconcile filial affection and social justice. This concept exists in the Analects, but it is not so actively expressed, as we have discussed. In the Mencius this concept is a serious issue, which makes it more influential. But Mencius' concept of it is still different from that in the Xunzi or the Book of Filial-ity. Though for Mencius filiality is completely based on affection, the Xunzi puts more stress on social justice as the basis of remonstrance. Third, Mencius' excessive affectionism sanctions the utilitarian-ism found in the Book of Filiality. This is very ironic, because affectionism is radically opposed to utilitarianism, as Mencius himself said CVIb-4, Lau p.247) [ 5 2 ] . But if nepotism is permitted under the name of filial piety, filiality will be more valued for its benefits. For example, in his interpretation of a myth of Shun, which has been also mentioned before, Mencius affirms the nepotism of Shun who enfeoffed his wicked brother (Va-3, Lau p . l83 ) [ S 3 ] . And if one can win the confidence of his superiors and get a high rank because of his filial piety (IVa-12, Lau p . l 47 ) [ 5 4 ] , to be filial will be advantageous in society. Thus, filiality is supported by its social advantage. In other words, Mencius sets up filiality as the highest value for society and government, and this cannot but open the way to its utilitarianism. Finally, related with the above, it can be pointed out that Mencius' theory of filiality has a tendency to promote egalitarianism. Because the higher status and wealth of a son would provide better wel-9 4 fare for his parents, the ethics of filiality place high value on advancement in life, such as rising to higher administrative positions, attaining eminence and accumulating a fortune. In a chapter which is also related to the myth of Shun, a disciple of Mencius asks his mentor whether Shun treated his father as a subject. This shows that in the time of Mencius there existed a doubt about the political contradiction between the concept of "the Son of Heaven" and filiality as familial ethics; a doubt as to whether the Son of Heaven should be followed by his parents, since "of all the subjects on the earth, there are none who are not the servants of the king. ¥ ± ^ . ^ , ^ # j £ S " Cno.205 in the Book of Odes. Karlgren 1944 p.244, MS-HY p.49). Mencius succeeds in overcoming this contradiction and supporting filiality more strongly by defining filiality of the Son of Heaven as the highest stage of filiality, as is shown by the citation below: The greatest thing a dutiful son can do is to honour his parents; the greatest thing he can do to honour his parents is to nourish them with the World. To be the father of the Emperor is the highest possible honour. To nourish them with the World is the greatest nourishment. (Va-4, Lau p. 187) ^Zm, M±¥WM.  J#iI£M, H*TO3^Tfio & ^ T £ , #£Mi&. £ * ^ T * . ^£M-t&o (MZ-HY p.36, MZZS vol.9a, p.71) t 5 5 ] If "the greatest thing a dutiful son can do" is "to nourish them with the World", everyone wants to and should be the Son of Heaven, because filiality aims limitlessly at the satisfaction of affection for parents. At least, filiality requires a son to get a higher status or more wealth because his better status honours his parents more and because his more wealth provides better service for them. So, advancement in life is sanctioned and promoted by filial piety. Mencius' idea of this shows his tendency toward egalitarianism because, according to it, anybody can try to be the Emperor. This egalitarian tendency is also a characteristic we 9 5 can find in the Book of Filiality. For instance, when the Book of Filiality says, "We develop our own personality and practice the Way so as to perpetuate our name for future generation, and to give glory to our parents. This is the end of filiality ±L%frM,  Wi&W&Wi.  SIMX U , ^^.l^'lfc" (Makra p.3), it connotates that to be a filial son is to attain eminence. The book also says, "In the practice of filiality, nothing is greater than to reverence one's father. In reverencing one's father, nothing is greater than making him a companion of Heaven. ^ H ; ^ jfeMlti. MlZMMlli^"  [Makra p. 19); if the greatest filiality is to make a sacrifice to one's parents in combination with Heaven, which only the Son of Heaven can make, everyone should be the Son of Heaven so as to make the sacrifice. Thus, the filiality of Mencius has the potential to be troublesome for monarchical government because Mencius' affectionism brings about utilitarianism, and the obedience to authority he asserts produces egalitarianism. Naturally, Mencius does not ignore that filiality produces a conservative and obedient mentality, because the essence of filiality requires "watching over one's own character" [IVa-19, Lau p . l 53 ) f S 6 ] . Mencius also asserts that obedience to parents is obedience to social norms, because if one commits a crime it can bring danger to his parents as well as himself (VIIb-7, Lau p.289). But his "excessive affectionism" tends to permit affection to transcend social norms. This tendency is found also in his discussion about righteousness and the rites. Mencius' idea of filiality includes the relation between filiality and social justice. For example, he says in the example which has been mentioned above; Only now do I realize how serious it is to kill a member of the family of another man. If you killed his father, he would kill your father; if you killed his elder brother, he would kill your elder brother. This being the case, though you may not have killed your father and brother with your own hand, it is but one step removed. (VIIb-7, Lau p.289) m^m&mmAmzm&. ^A^m,  A * « # . SA^H, A ^ « H „ £*MlJ# §!££-&, -fflMo  CMZ-HY p.55; MZZS vol.l4a, p.110) He is obviously asserting here that the internal feeling of filiality should accord with the external ethics, because keeping social norms means bringing about no trouble to one's parents. Mencius, however, would enter a protest against this expression, because he does not admit that Tightness (social justice) is external, as can be seen in his dispute with Meng Jizi i S ^ - p (VIa-5, Lau p.225) [ 6 7 ] , which will be discussed below. This episode is confused enough to need careful examination. The dispute began when Meng Jizi, whose career is not known, examined close-ly why Gongduzi QM~f*>  a disciple of Mencius, said that Tightness (yi J | ) was internal (nei f*J). Gongduzi replied that it was because "the respect in me (wu jing pf^t)" is being put into effect, but Meng Jizi proved that respect CJing $St) was external (wai JIO. by showing that the object of respect changes according to situations. For example, if a man from the village where one lives was a year older than one's eldest brother, one would respect the latter more. But in a public banquet in which age-group structure was important, one would have to show more respect to the former. Meng Jizi's idea is that cultural codes, such as social regulations, customs or laws, decide the object of respect (who should respect whom). Because respect is controlled by cultural codes, which are outside human mind, respect is external. Gongduzi could not refute this, and asked his mentor for help. Mencius advised him to distinguish normal respect from temporary respect; for example, one had to show his respect even to his younger brother when the latter was impersonating an ancestor at a sacrifice. Listening to this, however, 9 7 Meng Jizi asserted that the Mencius' indication supported the external-ity of respect. The final objection Gongduzi made was that a different object of respect in a different situation does not support the externality of respect, just as appetite for drinking cannot be said to be external even though one wants to drink hot water in winter, and cold water in summer. The first point we can learn from this chapter is that both sides agree to identify rightness with respect. We assume that humanity or ren {Z is a coordinate concept with rightness, in spite of the absence of specific references, because humanity and rightness usually make a pair in Mencius. It was evidently common in this period to think humanity as internal and rightness as external, as is shown in another chapter [Vla-4, Lau p. l41)C 5 8 ] . Next, Meng Jizi and Gongduzi seem to talk at cross-purposes; the former is discussing the objective criteria for "respect". Because it is "rightness" to express "respect" to a proper person in a proper context, "rightness" is obeying the external social codes. On the contrary, Gongduzi thinks that "rightness" is the feeling of "respect" to the object which should be respected. Because this feeling does not change though the object is changed, it exists within the mind. Meng Jizi's point is that external rightness controls the internal nature or feeling. Therefore, his views are quite similar to Xun Qing's inter-pretation of the rites or li Hf, which will be discussed later. Gongdu-zi, ignoring the objective criteria for rightness, attributes justice to the sphere of feeling. [See Graham 1990, p.47). As this chapter suggests, Mencius does not see familial affection and social justice as opposed to each other, for social justice (= rightness] is identified with respect to senior members of a family; it is "internal", that is, based on familial affection. Naturally one does not know social norms by nature, but Mencius seems to think they are learned naturally in the process of socialization, as when he says that O S no young children "when they grow up will not know respecting one's elder brothers" (VIIa-15, Lau p.269) [ 5 9 ] . According to Mencius, the unified personality of an ideal mature person is a well balanced synthesis of natural feeling and acquired ethics. The negation of a serious contradiction between internal feeling and external justice is the basic premise of Mencius' discussion of the relationship between filiality and the Rites (li $ff). As in the Analects, Mencius also lays stress on mourning, especially the three years' mourning, based on his emphasis on interior attitudes. Caring for one's parents when they are alive is not worth being described as of major importance; it is treating them decently when they die that is worth such a description. (IVb-13, Lau p. 163) * £ # ^ J £ M ; * : ^ mmK"I&n*m a CMZZS vol.8a, p.62) In addition, Mencius, citing a statement of Zeng Can, says that "the funeral of a parent is an occasion for giving of one's utmost MM*  @3f SSHfe" (ffia-2, Lau p .93) [ 6 0 ] . This idea is quite similar to that in the Analects, which says, "Though a man may never before have shown all that is in him, he is certain to do so when mourning for a father or mother A ^ ^ S S * ^ & M f t ¥ o " CXIX-17, See p.76 of this chapter). But though both value feeling more than form, the atmosphere of Mencius is different from that of the Analects. Here we will take an example which concerns Mencius' own mother. Her funeral seems to have been so splendid, compared with the funeral of his father who died when Mencius was young, that it could be basis for criticism of him (lb-16, Lau p .47) [ 6 1 ] . A disciple of his, Chong Yu 3&M,  also wondered and asked him about it. Answering him, Mencius asserted that the mourning rites are the way to "express fully one's filial love i S ^ A ' t V and to have the satisfaction of doing his best for his parents. It gives the living some solace "to prevent the earth from coming into contact with the dead", and those who can afford to use the inner and outer coffins can have "the satisfaction t$" (IIb-7, Lau p .81) [ 6 2 ] . The same theme is dis-cussed in the debate with a Mohist, in which Mencius supposes that funeral rites did not exist in ancient times, but originated in the revulsion that one had in seeing his parents' bodies "eaten by foxes and sucked by flies" [IIIa-5, Lau p . l l l ) [ 6 3 ] . This suggests that if a son does not use lavish funeral materials when he can afford them, he will necessarily repent not having done his best for his parents. Thus, Mencius thinks, or tends to think, that one should perform funeral rites that are as luxurious as possible. As far as the ideas of mourning are concerned, the basic difference between Mencius and the Analects can be summarized as that in the latter the purpose of mourning rites is only the expression of inner feelings (that is, grief) and there is no doubt as to following the social codes prescribing how to perform mourning. In the Mencius, ritual activities aim at satisfying oneself by expressing inner feelings as honorably as possible. This theory of Mencius has the same logic as his excessive affectionism. In his basic idea of filiality, the ideal is the harmony of a family, which one should pursue limitlessly. In the same way, one should pursue the perfect expression of his affection in ritual until he is satisfied that he has done everything he can. Therefore, what a filial son pursues is limitless — the ultimate goal is being the Son of Heaven — and external restrictions, including the regulations of li #8, are a type of obstacle, within the limit of which one should try to satisfy his affection. For example, when asked whether it is better to observe a year's mourning than not to observe any mourning at all, Mencius said no. But when a son of King Xuan of Q,i requested a few months' mourning for his mother, Mencius permitted this because she was not the principal wife of the king, and it is a code of rites for a son of a secondary wife not to observe a three years' mourning CVIIa-39, Lau p.281. In this case, his mourning was for nine months' dagong ^C5(j. YLZS l O O vol.32, p. 170). Indeed Mencius defines the rites or li H as "the regulation and adornment WJC"  of humanity or ren {H, which is identified with filiality, and Tightness or yi i t , which is identified with dutifulness to elder brothers, and admits that the rites have the function to control feelings (IVa-27, Lau p . l 57 ) [ 6 4 ] . But it is evident that his understanding of filiality has a tendency to conflict with norms or with society, as when he says, "a gentleman would not for all the world skimp on expenditure where his parents are concerned. | j - f ^^K ? c T » £ * . " CHb-7, Lau p .83) [ 6 5 ] . What should not be forgotten, however, is that Mencius does not ignore the importance of the Rites or li |H, as is demonstrated by an episode related with Duke Wen of Teng [IIIa-2, Lau p .93) [ 6 6 ] . This chapter is a little difficult to understand because there is no reference to grief in this mourning; when his father died, Duke Wen, who adored Mencius, asked what to do. Mencius, praising the new duke, advised him to do a three years' mourning. When Duke Wen, overcoming various objections, kept Mencius' advice, "the mourners were greatly delighted". The word Lau translates into "delighted" Cyue $&)  can be understood as "satisfied", so we do not have to think that the mourners had a good time. But at least here there is a stress on the social function of mourning rather than the mere expression of internal grief. It is possible to think that Mencius tends to admire those who carried out lavish mourning disregarding their internal grief. Because no internal feeling is visible, it cannot but be judged by the mourning rites actually carried out; the more lavish the mourning rites are, the more admired a son is. If so, Mencius' idea of mourning tends to merely justify ostentatious funeral rites. But it is dangerous to conclude this from just one example, so we should be satisfied with the conclusion that the rites were admitted by Mencius to have the social function of conveying the spirit of filiality to people. l O l Mencius' concept of filiality has a unique and important position in Zhanguo discussions of filiality. First, he founded filiality on smaller families after the collapse of patrilineal descent groups. Second, he advocated that filiality should be the basic and highest principle of both government and social justice. It is this concept that makes the discussion about filiality so important in the Chinese philosophical tradition. Third, paradoxically, the superiority of filiality to anything else, which he maintains, reveals the contra-diction not only between filiality and government, but between filial affection and social norms, though he himself regards them monistically. His affectionism easily overcomes laws or social regulations important in the Confucian tradition. In other words, his way to overcome the contradiction was difficult for that period to adopt. Later philosophers had to search for another way to unify familial feeling and social justice. We will see one attempt, that of Xun Qing, in the next section. [3) The idea of filiality in the writings of Xun Qing ^ijffl Xun Qing [Xunzi #^fS c. 313-215 B.C.E.?) was a philosopher in the late Zhanguo period, who belonged to the line of Zixia ^PJE ( c 507-420 B.C.E.) or Ziyou ^ $ f in the Confucian tradition which was opposed to the school Mencius belonged to (Kano 1953 p. 166, Takeuchi 1978 vol.8, p.80, Gao Zhuancheng p.289) [ 6 7 ] . Xun Qing did not discuss his theory of filiality in detail; he is better known for his theory of the Rites, that is, his emphasis on regulatory patterns for human nature. Under his tuition appeared such a Legalist thinker as Hanfeizi $i|#-JS who thought laws supreme. But the "Discussions of Rites [lirun |§tra)" chapter in his book, the Xunzi, which concerns mourning and ancestral rites, is interesting because it shows his ideas about the relation between filiality and rites. This theory of his was important in the Confucian 1 0 2 tradition, and his disciples developed his ideas into an imposing system, which can be seen in the Book of Rites. This is the reason why we deal with him here. However, there are some chronological problems in the above brief description. First, Xun Qing is thought to have lived to a great age; his activity is said to have been at the peak during the reign of King Xiang of Qi (r. 283-265 B.C.E.), when he was a head of scholars at the Jixia |§T^ academy, but he continued to work after the coronation of King Kaolie of Chu [238 B.C.) in the city of Lanling (Shiji vol.74, p.2348). According to another source, he was still alive after the unification of China by First Emperor (221 B.C. You Guoen p. 103; Liang Qichao p. 109; Luo Genze p. 138; Knoblock 1988, p.35). Naturally, there must have been some changes in his thought, but it is difficult to know them exactly from his book. Knoblock tries this task, and attributes the Lilun chapter to the period when Xun Qing stayed in Chu ( c 283-275 B.C.E., Knoblock 1983 and 1988 vol.1, p.8-11). Secondly, the whole book was not written by him; some chapters, including the Zidao -f-M  chapter which will be dealt with later, are supposed to have been added by his disciples after his death (Qu Wanli 1983, p.410). However, these chapters are a collection of "records, traditions and various matters that Xun Qing and his disciples cited ^WR^^Wx 3[fBffifft#" [Wang Xianqian p.520). We can assume at least that the Xunzi reflects the philosophical achievements of the last stage of the Zhanguo period. As well known, Xun Qing thinks that human nature is evil, and li iff or rites are the device for rectifying it. Rites include both "emotion" and "form"; When rites are performed in the highest manner, then both emotions and the forms embodying them are fully realized; in the next best manner, the emotional content and the forms prevail by turns; in the poorest manner, everything reverts to emotion and finds unity in 1 0 3 that alone. [Watson p.94) mmmmxmm, ^A$HCRB,  &rmm &»*—&. CXZ-HY P.7U When form and meaning, and emotion and practical use, are treated as the inside and outside or the front and back of a single reality and are both looked after, then rites have reached the middle state. (Watson p.96) xmmm. m%>\Hftmm.  mmm.  M ± * » H & . CXZ-HY P.72) What Xun Qing calls "emotion" includes filial affection, and so-called "form" the regulations or conventions of ritual. The concept of "form" represents the elements we sometimes call symbolical. Xun Qing does not deny that rituals are the way to express feeling, but thinks it ideal to express both emotion and form perfectly. This is well shown in the paragraph below: Therefore, it is said that human nature is the basis and raw material, and conscious activity (= artificial means) is responsible for what is adorned, ordered and flourishing. If there were no human nature, there would be nothing for conscious activity to work upon, and if there were no conscious activity, then human nature would have no way to beautify itself. Only when nature and conscious activity combine does a true sage emerge and perform the task of unifying the world. [Watson p. 102) *£B3t, ttft£, &&SA££, -3^T£5M^)Mo CXZ-HY p.73) His concept of rites is a synthesis, in a dialectical sense, of internal feelings and external regulations, or a synthesis of nature and culture. Therefore, he is not satisfied with either internal feeling only nor external regulation only. If the former is left as it is, it will result in Hobbsean war CWatson p.89) '-68^  . That is the case in filial feeling; if one's grief expressed in his mourning for his parents is extreme, it may be harmful to himself. He must regulate himself by 1 0 4 following the regulations of rites so as not to fall into such a condition (Watson p.lOO) [69 ] . On the other hand, Xun Qing asserts from the viewpoint of affection to parents that one should not prepare funeral materials beforehand to pursue only the perfection of formality [Watson p .98) t 7 0 ] . And "for the mourner to measure the quality of his food before eating, to measure the size of his waist before tying his sash, and to strive deliberately for a distraught and emaciated appearance is the way of evil men. It does not represent the proper form of ritual principle nor the proper emotions of a filial son. SJtffiJ^ £, §^M£. ttM&mm* &MAZM. #mmzx&.  ##^^if0 -[Watson p. 101, XZ-HY p.73). Mere formality without affection should be rejected. Thus, what is desired is to satisfy the feelings through the regulated forms; this is nothing but the essential function of rites. Rites trim what is too long and stretch out what is too short, eliminate surplus and repair deficiency, extend the forms of love and reverence, and step by step bring to fulfillment the beauties of proper conduct. [Watson p. 100) *#, mmmm,  m%$&,  #*&, mmmzx.  mmmftmzm&o  [XZ-HY p.73) Xun Qing also says in another place that, if one can trim or stretch his emotions, broaden or narrow them and express them properly, he can achieve true rites [Watson p . l 0 2 ) t 7 1 ] . As we have seen in the previous sections, mourning was the most prominent ritual of filiality. Because Xun Qing also put much stress on mourning, his idea of filiality are found in his teaching about mourn-ing. Compared with the Analects and Mencius, the basic features of his teaching about filiality are as follows. First, he admits mourning as the expression of the internal affection to parents, just as the Analects and Mencius did. If in burying parents "he failed to show 1 0 5 either grief or reverence, then he is not better than a beast ^F.R^i5t, M ' J J i i ^ i l ^ " (Watson p. 100, XZ-HY p.73). Mourning rites are not for the parents' sake but to express one's affection to parents, that is, the internalized image of parents. If one is "generous in the treatment of his living parents but skimpy in the treatment of the dead ;£Jf*;S^feffi]|^  ^c^E", that means he pretends to be respectful though he is not, so he is "an evil man J IA" [Watson p.97, XZ-HY p.72). Mourning is carried out because one's affection does not change whether the parents are alive or dead, though the forms of its expression change. So, "one adorns the dead (parents) as though they were still living, and sends them to the grave with forms symbolic of life. They are treated as though dead, and yet as though still alive, as though gone, and yet as though still present « £ # # # # , *&&£&3l£?E- t& . #C#tl?E$D£. $ P t $ P # " (Watson p. 103, XZ-HY p.73-4). If we compare this idea with a chapter of the Analects, "one should sacrifice to a spirit as though that spirits was present ^#$D#-fi:" (Waley p.97), we can see clearly the influence of the latter upon the former. Next, however, we see that the difference between the Analects or Mencius and Xun Qing lies in the fact that Xun Qing recognizes that filial affection can be harmful to itself if it is not restrained. He admits that one of the functions of mourning rites is "changing and adorning the appearance of the dead person, to keep moving him farther and farther away S(Tnl$» HbWlJig", because if the living are too close to the dead the latter will loathe the former (because of the ugliness) and lose the feeling of respect (Watson p.99, XZ-HY p.73). In addition, the extreme of grief can be dangerous to mourners. Mourning should be the way for them to return gradually to their regular way of life, and "to kill the living and force them to accompany the dead is confused ^J^iM Pft?E, M2.J&"  (Watson p.105, XZ-HY p .74) [ 7 2 ] . These explanations convey a kind of rationalism, which can be seen as a characteristic of Xun 1 0 6 Qing's thought. Because his intention lies in the maintenance of the social order, he is a moderate and practical thinker who thinks from the viewpoint of society. His rationalism is contrary to the transcendental tendency (= excessive aifectionism) of Mencius. The third feature of Xun Qing's ideas about filiality, compared