Late Imperial China, 27.2, pp.

1-37

Religious Dimensions of Filial Piety as Developed in Late Ming Interpretations of the

Xiaojing

Miaw-fen Lu

During the late Ming (from around 1580s onward) a wave of studying, publishing,

and promoting the Xiaojing (The classic of filial piety) emerged in the Zhejiang area.

Zhu Hong (b. 1510), Sun Ben, Shen Hui, and Yu Chunxi (1553-1621) are representative

of this trend. Their extant works on the subject are collected in the Xiaojing zonglei (A

compilation of the Xiaojing-related texts), compiled by Zhu Hong and published circa

1580-1590. 1 Among these scholars, Zhu Hong and Sun Ben interpreted the Xiaojing

from a socio-political perspective, which emphasized governance of the state through

filial piety, while Yu Chunxi expressed more religious and personal concerns,

The author is grateful to Tu Weiming, Paul R. Katz, Peter Zarrow, Chi-Shing Chak, Jennifer
Eichman, Hun Y. Lye, Charles B. Jones, and three reviewers for Late Imperial China for their valuable
comments and suggestions. Previous versions of this paper were presented at the 32nd Annual Meeting of
SouthWest Conference on Asian Studies, University of Houston, 10-11 October 2003, and the 2004 Annual
Meetings of American Academy of Religion, San Antonio, Texas, 20-23 November 2004. Research for this
paper was funded by grants from National Science Council, Taiwan.
1
The proximate dates of publication were determined by an examination of the prefaces and postscripts to
a late Ming version of Xiaojing zonglei (12 juan), which was kept in the National Library of Beijing and
collected in Xuxiu Sikuqushu (Continued edition of the complete collections of the four treasuries) and
republished by Shanghai guji chubanshe in 1995. In fact, Zhu Hong’s compilation of the Xiaojing-related
texts had various versions. In addition to the above-mentioned edition, others include both Xiaojing huiji
(Compilation of the Xiaojing-related texts) (18 juan and 14 juan, in National Central Library, Taipei),
another version of Xiaojing zonglei (16 juan, in National Palace Museum, Taipei), Xiaojing congshu
(Collection of the Xiaojing-related texts, in National Library of Beijing, and several other versions now
kept in libraries in Japan. For more detailed information, see Kaji Nobuyuki, Chūgoku sisō kara mita nihon
sisōsi kenkyū (Studies of Japanese intellectual history from the perspective of Chinese thought) (Tokyo:
Yoshikwa kōbunkan, 1985), pp. 174-188.

1
emphasizing that filial piety could offer the means to stimulate the moral universe. These

two discourses about the filial piety and the Xiaojing did not contradict with each other,

but had in fact co-existed for centuries. Moreover, Zhu Hong, Sun Ben, and Yu Chunxi

had similar opinions regarding the authority and authenticity of the Xiaojing text, and

they all shared an enthusiasm for promoting the study of the Xiaojing. They believed that

contemporary neglect of the Xiaojing was a serious socio-political issue and argued for

the necessity to re-include it as a required text in the civil service examinations.

Accordingly, even though their interpretations of the Xiaojing differed, they refrained

from debate with each other and rather treated each other as allies in the promotion of the

Xiaojing. 2 These scholars’ works were later re-compiled by Jiang Yuanzuo, also a

Zhejiang scholar, into a text entitled Xiaojing daquan (A complete annotated edition of

Xiaojing), published circa 1633, which not only continued to circulate in China but was

also brought to Japan. 3

The socio-political discourse on the Xiaojing during the late Ming vigorously

defended the authenticity of the text by arguing against the doubts raised by Zhu Xi

(1130-1200) and emphasized the special position of the Xiaojing with the Chunqiu (The

Spring and Autumn Annals). Both texts were believed written by Confucius and hence

carried the sage’s teaching about political governance. I have discussed these in another

article. 4 Here, therefore, I will focus on another aspect of the late Ming discourse about

the Xiaojingū: its religious implications and the practice of daily self-cultivation. Before

2
For a detail discussion about these scholars’ different viewpoints and cooperation, see Miaw-fen Lu,
“Wan-Ming shiren lun Xiaojing yu zhengzhi jiaohua” (The Classic of Filial Piety and its political
implications in the late Ming), Taida wenshizhe xuebao, 61 (2005), pp. 223-260.
3
For the proximate date of publication, see the preface written by Chiang Yuanzuo, Xiaojing daquan
(Jinan: Shandong youyi shushe, 1991). For the Xiaojing daquan in Japan, see Kimura Mitsunori, Nakae
Tōju (Tokyo: Meidoku shupansha, 1994), p. 104.
4
Miaw-fen Lu, “Wan-Ming shiren lun Xiaojing yu zhengzhi jiaohua.”

2
going into this discussion, two points require further explanation.

First, the term “religious dimensions” in the title refers to a loose definition of

“religion” based on the Ming’s own conceptions of what we can call the non-mundane.

The concept of “religion” of course arose in the West as counterpoint to the notion of the

“secular.” In the milieu of postmodernism and poststructuralism, especially, the question

“What is religion?” becomes deeply problematic because of its essentialist connotations.

Jonathan Z. Smith even argues that “religion” is “a term created by scholars for their

intellectual purposes and therefore is theirs to define.” Smith says: “It is a second-order,

generic concept that plays the same role in establishing a disciplinary horizon that a

concept such as ‘language’ plays in linguistics or ‘culture’ plays in anthropology.” 5

Smith’s arguments may not convince everyone, but the little consensus about what

“religion” is attests to the turmoil in contemporary religious studies. In order to

appreciate the richness and complexity of religious life and also because of the lack of

fixed comprehensive explanatory theory, contemporary religious studies clearly

demonstrate a multidisciplinary approach and a multicultural characteristic. 6

Western observers, using exclusive categories, long puzzled over whether

Confucianism was a philosophy or a religion. More recently, however, multidisciplinary

approaches have precisely led to a greater appreciation of Confucian religiosity. Julia

Ching, Tu Wei-ming, Rodney Taylor, and Kiril Thompson have all analyzed

Confucianism as a religious tradition. 7 The notions of Heaven (tian), fate (ming),

5
Jonathan Z. Smith, “Religion, Religions, Religious,” in Mark C Taylor, ed., Critical Terms for Religious
Studies (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1998), p. 281-282.
6
Mark C. Taylor, Critical Terms for Religious Studies; Walter Capps, Religious Studies: The Making of a
Discipline (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1995).
7
Julia Ching, Mysticism and Kingship in China (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997); Tu
Wei-ming, Centrality and Commonality (New York: State University of New York Press, 1989); Rodney
Taylor, The Religious Dimensions of Confucianism (New York: State University of New York Press, 1990);

3
reverence (jing), the unity between the individual and the Heaven, the learning process

for self-transformation, and various kinds of ritual practice are focuses for research

informed by comparative religious studies. 8 Even though this recent scholarship has

greatly enriched our understanding of the religious dimensions of Confucianism, the

meaning of Confucian religiosity is impossible to precisely define and remains open to

new interpretations. Therefore, instead of providing a precise definition, I use the term

“religious dimensions” in this paper to refer to notions found in the Confucian tradition

such as correlative thinking, sympathetic resonance (ganying) between heaven and

human beings, the accumulation of goodness and retribution, and self-cultivation aiming

to reach the Spirit (shen), which will be discussed in detail below.

Second, it should be noted that although Yu Chunxi is a central figure in this article,

I am not attempting to fully explore Yu Chunxi’s thought or his religious life. Instead, Yu

is relevant insofar as his thought represents broader Ming concerns with the Xiaojing and

his works also include texts quoted from various previous sources. The complex and rich

resources in Yu Chunxi’s work about the Xiaojing require further investigation into the

cultural context of the formation of Yu’s work and his ideas. Moreover, Yu must be

situated in the broader Ming Xiaojing discourse, which shared many elements but also

contained differences. The discussion below thus begins with an examination of Yu

Chunxi’s discourse on filial piety and the Xiaojing, and then moves on to articulate the

cultural context of Yu’s ideas, especially in terms of their relationship to the

“The Study of Confucianism as a Religious Traditions: Notes on Some Recent Publications,” Journal of
Chinese Religions, 18 (1990), pp. 143-159; Kirill Ole Thompson, “The Religious in Neo-Confucianism,”
Asian Culture Quarterly, 18.4 (1990), pp. 44-57.
8
Rodney Raylor, Gary Arbuckle, “Confucianism,” The Journal of Asian Studies, 54.2 (1995), pp. 347-354.
Also see Thomas A Wilson, ed., On Sacred Grounds (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Asia Center,
Harvard University Press, 2002).

4
contemporary [Wang] Yangming School.

Yu Chunxi on filial piety

Yu Chunxi, a native of Qiantang in Zhejiang Province, was a renowned and erudite

literatus, highly regarded for his expertise in the areas of Buddhism, literature, and Lixue

(Neo-Confucianism). 9 Huang Ruheng (1558-1626) honored him as one of the four great

talents of the late Ming literary world; 10 Li Rihua (1565-1635) compared him with Tang

Xianzu (1550-1616) and praised them both as the most creative and elegant

contemporary writers. 11 Both Huang and Li were especially impressed by Yu Chunxi’s

profound knowledge and extraordinary performance in different cultural settings, from

Confucian scholars’ associations of jianghui (discussion meetings), to Zen Buddhist

meditation groups, and to literary societies. In reference to his erudition, Yu himself once

proudly claimed: “I heard of weishi (mind-only theory) when I was three-years old, and

liangzhi (innate knowing) when I was five.” 12

Yu Chunxi called himself a lofty and lonely person but befriended many famous

Lixue scholars, including Ji Ben (1485-1563), Wang Ji, Luo Rufang (1515-1588), Yang

Qiyuan (1547-1599), Meng Qiu, and Gu Xiancheng (1550-1612). 13 Although he was

9
I use “lixue” to refer to the mainstream of Confucianism from the Song to the Ming, including both the
Cheng-Zhu and Yangming schools. Both the Cheng-Zhu and Yangming schools were in the same
intellectual tradition and both took the notion of “heavenly principle” (tian li) as the ultimate criterion of
value system; furthermore, this usage of “lixue” follows that used by Ming-Qing scholars.
10
Huang Ruheng, “Yu Changru ji xu” (Preface to the collected works of Yu Chunxi), in Yu Deyuan
xiansheng ji (Collected works of Yu Chunxi) (Beijing: Beijing chubanshe, 2000).
11
Li Rihua, “Yu Deyuan xiansheng ji xu” (Preface to the collected works of Yu Chunxi), collected in
Deyuan xiansheng ji.
12
Yu Chunxi, “Nanxun lu xu” (Preface to Nanxun lu), in Yu Deyuan xiansheng ji, juan 5, p. 2b.
13
See Yu Chunxi, “Nanxun lu xu” Yu Deyuan xiansheng ji, juan 5, p. 2b.

5
closely associated with Lixue scholars and actively participated in their discussions, Yu

was more a Buddhist. According to Yu’s biography, he was born with a special

intelligence and had studied Buddhism from a very young age. Not long after he attained

the jinshi degree in 1583 and served for a short time in government, he returned home to

mourn his father's death. During the mourning period, he converted to Buddhism and

became a formal disciple of Zhuhong (1535-1615). Later he went to Mount Tianmu for

intensive practice. While there, Yu Chunxi sat on the famous cliff where the Zen master

Kaofeng Yuanmiao (1238-1295) once desperately sought enlightenment. After

intensively practicing day and night, Yu was exhausted. But it was just in this weary and

fatigued state that he became enlightened. He then rushed to see Zhuhong for verification.

Zhuhong instructed him to stick to the teachings of the Pure Land School in order to

prevent the experience of enlightenment from obstructing further practice. Afterwards,

Yu Chunxi faithfully observed the precepts and teachings of the Pure Land School for the

rest of his life. 14 In about 1595 when Zhuhong taught at Mount Nanping, raising funds

for pond building and organizing societies for “releasing life” (fangsheng hui ), in which

thousands of lay people participated, Yu Chunxi served as one of the top

administrators. 15 Yu also organized a lay Buddhist society named the Shenglian she

(Luxuriant Lotus Society) nearby at the West Lake.16 In the last period of his life, Yu

withdrew from society and lived in seclusion at Mount Nanping carrying out Buddhist

14
Peng Jiqing, Jushi zhuan (Biographies of lay Buddhist practitioners) (Chengdu: Chengdu guji shudian,
2000), pp. 215-216.
15
For Zhuhong’s teaching on Mountain Nanping, see Araki Kengo, Zhou Xianbo trans., Jinshi Zhongguo
fojiao de shukuang: Yunqi Zhu Hong zhi yanjiu (The twilight of Chinese Buddhism in the pre-Modern ear:
studies on Yunqi Zhuhong) (Taipei: Huiming wenhua, 2001), pp. 131-132. Also see Yu Chunxi,
“Wangongchi ji,” (Record of Wangong pond), in Yu Deyuan xiansheng ji, juan 7, pp. 47b-48a.
16
See Chung-fang Yu, The Renewal of Buddhism in China: Chu-Hung and the Late Ming Synthesis (New
York: Columbia University Press, 1981), p. 85.

6
practice. 17

Many biographies of Yu Chunxi bear the mark of miracles and magic. It was said

that when Yu was very young he was able to recognize auspicious signs and encouraged

people to recite the name Amitābha Buddha. 18 Another anecdote records that in 1581

while Yu was reading on Mount Pi in Huzhou, he practiced long-term abstinence and the

penitential rites originated by Emperor Wu of Liang (Lianghuang chan). People were

moved by his sincerity and many joined him for the penitential rites. At midnight,

without taking off the ritual book, people dispersed to bed. Early the next morning, when

one participant returned to the room, he was surprised to see auspicious, fragrant clouds

filling the room. He immediately called everyone. When Yu Chunxi entered the room,

the auspicious clouds still filled a corner and the pillars were covered with pearl-like

droplets of dew. They all tasted the dew, but Yu’s taste of it was the lightest and purest

(dan). 19 There are many other anecdotes about Yu seeing auspicious signs, having

spiritual encounters, and experiencing strange metamorphoses which were recorded by

his good friend Feng Mengzhen (1548-1605) in Kuaixuetang manlu (Random notes from

the Quick-Snow Hall). 20

On more than one occasion, Yu claimed, due to his Buddhist practice, to have

foreknowledge of events. This capacity not only converted his friends to Buddhism and

to practice non-killing and the releasing of animals, but it also encouraged their attempts

17
Peng Jiqing, Jushi zhuan, pp.215-216.
18
Yu Chunxi, “Yu Wang Hongtai xianfu” (To Vice Censor-in-Chief Wang Hongtai), Yu Deyuan xiansheng
ji, juan 25, p. 22a-26a.
19
Feng Mengzhen, Kuaixuetang manlu (Chengdu: Bashu shushe, 2000), p. 11a; also see Peng Jiqing, Jushi
zhuan, p. 215.
20
Yu Chunxi and Feng Mengzhen, along with other scholars such as Dong Qichang, Huang Ruheng, Chen
Jiru, Pan Zhiheng, were close friends in a Buddhist study society. For their friendship, see for example Yu
Chunxi, “Xuanjin lushi zhuan” (Biography of the Master Xuanjin) in Yu Deyuan xiansheng ji, juan 9, pp.
10a-12a.

7
to cultivate similar capacities. 21 Although the monk Zhuhong felt that there was nothing

unnatural about the capacity for foreknowledge, he scolded Yu severely and forbade him

to continue this pursuit. He thought it was leading people astray from the right Way. 22 Yu

Chunxi later explained to Tu Long (1542-1605), an official-scholar who greatly admired

Yu’s spiritual pursuits, that it was possible to obtain the capacity of foreseeing through

practice but also echoed his master’s opinion, saying the capacity itself had nothing to do

with truly knowing the Way (liao Dao). 23

Whatever the exaggerations of these anecdotes, they make it clear that Yu Chunxi

was a person with religious interests who claimed to have an extraordinary capacity for

mysterious experiences. What is relevant to our concerns here is the similar mysterious

and spiritual valence seen in Yu’s discourse on filial piety and the Xiaojing. In the

following, I will introduce Yu’s ideas about filial piety from two perspectives: first, the

cosmic natural order and value system; and second, the purpose of learning and the

methods of practice.

(1) Natural order, human civilization, and filial piety

In terms that resonated with the apocrypha of the Xiaojing (Xiaojing wei), Yu

Chunxi said filial piety existed in the chaos (hundun) before the division of yin and yang:

filial piety was the great principle (da yi) in cosmic creative force: 24

21
Yu Chunxi, “Fangsheng mingwei youzan lu xu,” (Preface to the record of mysterious praise to those who
release life) Yu Deyuan xiansheng ji, juan 4, pp. 34b-35b.
22
Yu Chunxi, “Yunqi lianchi shizu zhuan” (Biography of Master Yuanqi Zhuhong) Yu Deyuan xiansheng ji,
juan 9, p. 7b. For Zhuhong’s explanation of why he disapproved of this, see ibid., juan 9, pp. 8b-9a.
23
Tu Long, Hong Bao (Grand enclosure) (Tainan: Zhuangyen, 1995), juan 39, p. 22a.
24
See for example, Xiaojing yuanshenqi and Xiaojing zuoqi (Two apocryphal text of the Xiaojing), in
Huang Shi ed. Huang shi yishu kao (Examination on the lost ancient books by Mr. Huang) (Taipei: Yiwen

8
 Filial piety was in the midst of chaos. From it heaven was born; so, heaven bears

the principle of filial piety. From it earth was born; so, earth bears the principle of

filial piety. From it human beings were born; so, human beings bear the principle

of filial piety. Because [filial piety] is eternally luminous, it is called the constant

method of heaven. Because it is perpetually beneficial (afforded by earth), it is

called the righteousness of earth. Because it is constantly in accord with all under

heaven, it is called the practical duty of man. In sum, filial piety is the constant

and unchangeable in heaven and earth; it is the great method (da fa) which has

neither beginning nor end; it is the innate knowing (liang zhi) inherent in all

human beings. 25

Yu Chunxi thus considered filial piety to be greater than a single ethical

prescription: it bore the mark of transcendence. In some passages, Yu appears to

conceive of xiao (filial piety) as a Spirit, whose power can penetrate the human world

and resonate with human beings. Yu once referred to the Spirit of filial piety in the

following terms: “ …There was one person who shines in the universe. His name is tian

(heaven). His courtesy name (zi) is xing (nature) and style name (hao) liangzhi.” 26

yinshu guan, 1971), vol. 21, p. 1b; p. 2a.

25
Yu Chunxi, Xiaojing eryan (Easy words about the Xiaojing), in Zhu Hong, ed., Xiaojing zonglei, shen ji,
p. 175.
26
Yu Chunxi, “Xiaojing jiling xu” (Preface to Xiaojing jiling), in Xiaojing zonglei, hai ji, p. 274.
27
The writers are Yu Chunxi and another assistant writer Chen Guanfen. Yu Chunxi, “Xiaojing jiling xu,”
in Xiaojing zonglei, hai ji, p. 274.
28
For the myth of the creation of the universe in Han Dynasty prognostication and apocrypha texts, see
Leng Dexi, Zhaoyue shenghua (Beyond myth) (Beijing: Dongfang chubanshe, 1996), pp. 54-80. For the
Daoist creator Taishang laojun, see Taishang laojun kaitian jing (Canon on creating the Heaven by
supreme Master Lao) (Taipei: Xinwenfeng, 1985), pp. 94-97. Also see Zhou Kaode, Daojiao wenhua yu
shenghuo (The culture and lives of Daoism) (Beijing: Zongjiao wenhua chubanshe, 1999), p. 23.

9
 刪除: l
刪除: p
刪除:

Another example is found in Yu’s preface to Xiaojing jiling (Collected spiritual stories

related to the Xiaojing), a book with examples from various kinds of texts which testify

to the sympathetic resonance between filial persons and the Spirit of filial piety. Yu said

that while writing this book, the Spirit frequently appeared in the writers’ dreams to

inform them of suitable examples. 27 Yu, therefore, did not think the book was written

solely through human effort, but also through the guidance of this Spirit.

Both Yu’s ideas of filial piety as a Spirit existed before the cosmic creation and his

experience of the Spirit’s instruction in writing the text were not unprecedented in

Chinese culture. Indeed, many Daoist and other religious texts also claimed to be written

while the authors were possessed by deities. Confucian prognostication and apocrypha

(chenwei) and Daoist legends also depict a cosmic creator who existed before the

creation of heaven and earth, yin and yang. 28 These previous Daoist and apocrypha texts

were often cited by Yu in his Xiaojing jiling. Furthermore, the sympathetic resonance

between filial persons and the Spirit (deities) demonstrated by Xiaojing jiling reflected

contemporary popular belief in the retribution and the accumulation of goodness, clearly

seen in numerous morality books. 29 These examples all remind us of how closely Yu’s

ideas resonated with Daoism and other popular religions in the late Ming.

In addition to cosmological meanings, Yu Chunxi also viewed filial piety as the

principal order of the harmonious natural world and ideal human society. Yu said: “The

29
Sakai Tadao, Chūgoku zensho no kenkyū (Studies on Chinese morality books), (Tokyo: Kobundo, 1960);
Cynthia Brokaw, The Ledgers of Merit and Demerit: Social Change and Moral Order in Late Imperial
China (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1991).
30
Yu Chunxi, Xiaojing reyan, in Xiaojing zonglei, shen ji, p. 171.
31
Xiaojing zuoqi, in Huang Shi ed., Huang shi yishu kao, vol. 21, p. 1b.
32
Apocryphal studies prospered during the Han Dynasty and gradually declined from the Six Dynasties
onwards, especially in the Sung. See Zhong Zhaopeng, Chenwei lunlue (Brief discussion on
prognostication and apocrypha) (Shenyang: Liaoning chubanshe, 1992), pp. 31-33.

10
great righteousness in the creation of heaven, earth, human beings, and myriad things is

fully embodied in the word filial piety.” 30 This idea that the order of the natural and

human worlds converges in filial piety was not originally proposed by Yu either. The

apocrypha of the Xiaojing proposed a similar idea: “In the midst of the chaos of vital

force (yuan qi) exists filial piety. It orders the sun, moon, and stars in heaven, and heaven

illuminates of itself; it orders filial piety, fraternal love, loyalty and faithfulness in the

human world and the human world automatically demonstrates its glories.” 31 Yu,

however, enthusiastically promoted this idea in the late Ming after a long decline in

interest in apocrypha. 32 He even created a diagram called Quan xiao tu to demonstrate

the relationship between creative power and filial piety. 33

33
Quanxiao tu is in Zhu Hong ed., Xiaojing zonglei, shen ji, p. 168.
34
Yu Chunxi, “Quanxiao tu shuo,” in Xiaojing zonglei, shen ji, p. 168.
35
Yu Chunxi, “Quanxiao xinfa,” in Xiaojing zonglei, shen ji, p. 169.
36
Yu Chunxi, “Quanxiao xinfa,” in Xiaojing zonglei, shen ji, p. 169.
37
See Huang Chin-shing, “’Xue’an ticai chansheng de sixiang beijing,” (The intellectual background to
the emergence of a historical genre, “philosophical records”), in You ru sheng yu (Entering the master’s
sanctuary) (Taipei: Yunchen wenhua, 1994), pp. 393-423.
38
For Yu Chunxi’s explanations, see Xiaojing zonglei, shen ji, pp. 167-168.
39
This translation is from William T. de Bary, ed., Sources of Chinese Tradition (New York: Columbia
University Press, 1964), p. 469.
40
Yu Chunxi, Xiaojing eryen, in Xiaojing zonglei, shen ji, p. 172.
41
Yu Chunxi, Zongchuan tu, in Xiaojin zonglei, shen ji, p. 168.
42
For a detail discussion, see Miaw-fen Lu, “Wan Ming shiren lun Xiaojing yu zheng zhi jiao hua.”
43
Yu Chunxi, “He Xiangming wulin dezheng shi xu” (Preface to the poetry about He Xiangming’s
achievement in his official service in Wulin) in Yu Deyuan xiansheng ji, juan 3, pp. 31b-35a; also see Zou
Yi, Qi Zhen yeh sheng (Unofficial history of the periods of Tianqi and Chongzhen)(Beijing: Beijing
chubanshe, 2000), juan 3, pp. 26a-28b.
44
Julia Ching, Mysticism and Kingship in China, ch. 2.
45
See Kong Yinda, Liji Zhengyi (Annotations of the Book of Rites), (Taipei: Yiwen yinshuguan, 1960),
juan 23, p. 4b.
46
Xiaojing zhengyi; see the annotations of Xiaojing in Shisanjing zhushu (Annotations of the thirteen
Classics) (Taipei: Yiwen yinshuguan, 1982), juan 8, pp. 1a-3b.
47
Sun Ben, Guwen Xiaojing shuo (On the old text of Xiaojing), in Xiaojing zhonglei, wu ji, p. 125.
48
Xiaojing zhengyi, juan 8, p. 2b.
49
See Yu Chunxi, Xiaojing eryen, in Xiaojing zonglei, shen ji, p. 182.
50
Xiaojing zhushu (Annotation of Xiaojing), (Taipei: Yiwen chubanshi, 1982), p. 36.
51
Yu Chunxi, Xiaojing eryen, in Xiaojing zonglei, shen ji, p. 177.
52
Yu Chunxi, Xiaojing eryen, in Xiaojing zonglei, shen ji, pp. 181-182.
53
Yu Chunxi, Xiaojing eryen, in Xiaojing zonglei, shen ji, pp. 182.
54
Yu Chunxi, Xiaojing eryen, in Xiaojing zonglei, shen ji, pp. 182.

11
 全 孝 圖
Diagram of Perfect Filial Piety

(Qian)

(Moon) (Fire) (Sun)

(S
)
ui

un
(D

)
(Daoists) (Buddhists)

(Master Hun-Dun, Emperor)

(Wood)

(Metal)

(Kan)
(Li)

(Earth)
(Imperial Marquises)
(Ministers,
Grand Masters)

(Commoners, Women) (Shih, Eunuchs)

(Mountains And Rivers,

Foreigners)
(Z
)
en

he
(K

n)

(Water)
(Plants) (Animals)

(Kun)

12
 In his explanation of the diagram, Yu said the outer circle represents Taixu (Great

Vacuity). All the things marked inside the circle were conceived of and produced by

Taixu. The diagram represents the creative power of filial piety. Yu further explained the

meaning of filial piety by means of glyphomancy (dissection of written characters). The

character xiao was composed by the upper part of the character lao (the elder) and the

character zi (the offspring). The position of lao on the top and zi below represents the

submissive, caring, hierarchical and harmonious relationship between father and son. Yu

further explored this relationship of filial piety in the following terms:

Taixu is the elder; heaven, earth, human beings and the myriad things are its

offspring. Qian is the elder; the submissive Kun is its offspring. Qian and Kun are

the elder; six sons are offspring. Qian and Kun are the elder; the Sun, Moon, five

elements, people and things are its offspring. The Sun is the elder; the Moon that

received the light is its offspring. The Sun and Moon are the elder; the five

elements, people and things are its offspring. The five elements that conceived

me are the elder; I am their offspring. The main ridge of a mountain is the elder;

the derivative ones are its offspring. The origin of rivers is the elder; tributaries

are its offspring. The five elements are the elder; the Master Hundun is its

offspring. The Master Hundun is the elder; human beings are its offspring. The

parents of Buddhists and Daoists are the elder; Buddhists and Daoists are their

offspring. The parents of millions of people are the elder; millions of people are

their offspring. The parents of the foreigners in the four directions are the elder;

the foreigners are their offspring. The nobles of five ranks are the elder; the

13
 commoners are their offspring. For animals and plants there are the male and the

female. Although the ways of reproduction are different, the principle is the same:

the one who gives birth is the progenitor (elder), and the one who receives life is

its offspring. So the elder should earn trust and reverence from the offspring and

the offspring should be submissive to the elder. There is no one who does not

obey this relationship of filial piety. 34

For Yu Chunxi, filial piety refers to the maintenance of proper and harmonious

relationships within the universe. The relationship is never static: it dynamically

transforms in accordance with changes in situation and status. Within the continual

transformations of the universe and human affairs, the relationship of filial piety

delineates the proper order and is prescribed for all; no one should or can escape. Hence

Yu conceives of filial piety as a synonym for the origin of human values and the natural

order.

Yu also called human beings the derivative body (yi ti) of heaven and earth, the

derivative body of Taixu. So, heaven and earth are the great parents (da fumu) of human

beings. 35 Because Yu conceived of filial piety in such an abstract way, filial piety became

more than merely the attitude and moral obligations of children toward their parents.

Instead, it encompassed the right attitude, or more precisely, the perfect mental state of

one living in the universe. Yu criticized those who deeply regretted that their parents had

died, leaving them no recourse to carry out their filial duty because they did not grasp the

true meaning of filial piety. He said that those who realize they are the progeny of Taixu

should know that wherever heaven and earth, ancestral temples (zongmiao), emperors

14
and teachers exist, they can fulfill their filial duty. No matter where they are, they can

reach and move the Spirit through their filial deeds. 36

Furthermore, Yu also interpreted filial piety from a historical and cultural

perspective. To articulate his vision of the cultural transmission of filial piety, he adopted

a lineage model of cultural transmission similar to that found in Daotong (the orthodox

lineage of the Dao). We know that each of the three teachings (Confucianism, Daoism,

and Buddhism) had constructed its own versions of an orthodox lineage, and that in

Confucianism, lineage construction was especially popular during the 16th and 17th

centuries. 37 Yu’s construction of the Zong chuan tu (Diagram of the orthodox

transmission) represents his contribution to this effort.

15
 圖 傳 宗
Diagram of the Orthodox Transmission

16
 Zong chuan tu was also called Xuetong zhi tu (Diagram of the lineage of orthodox

learning), because Yu viewed filial piety as the origin of natural harmony and human

values. Hence it represented the true spirit of learning. Yu further articulated his view by

adopting Yang Jian’s (1141-1225) philological opinion, claiming that, in ancient times,

the character xue (learning) and the character xiao were identical. In his version of the

orthodox lineage of Chinese civilization, Yu adopted two criteria: he included those who

set good examples for filial piety, and those who contributed greatly to the preservation

and transmission of the Xiaojing. 38

In regard to the transmission of learning, Yu depicted the orthodox lineage from

Confucius, Zeng Zi, Zi Si, and Mencius, to Song and Ming Lixue thinkers, especially

elevating the position of Zhang Zai (1020-1077) and Wang Yangming (1472-1528).

Zhang Zai’s theory of the Great Vacuity (taixu), creative force, and the themes of his

famous essay Xi ming (Western Inscription) are all echoed in Yu’s discourse on filial

piety. The Xi ming in particular advocated the idea that since all creation is formed of and

united by one single substance, so all sentient beings, and heaven and earth, should be

joined together as creatures of one flesh and blood, and ruled by the principle of

unselfish and humane love. This was also the quintessence of Yu’s interpretation of filial

piety. According to the Xi ming:

Heaven is my father and earth is my mother, and even such a small creature as I

find an intimate place in their midst. That which extends throughout the

universe I regard as my body and that which directs the universe I take as my

17
 nature. All people are my brothers and sisters, and all things are my

companions. 39

Compare this passage to Yu Chunxi’s Xiaojing eryan:

I received this body from my parents. My parents received theirs from my

grandparents. ……The original ancestor received his body from heaven and

earth, and heaven and earth from Taixu. Who is Taixu? The infinite number of

human beings and things under heaven and earth all constitute the body of

Taixu. It is like roads that lead to a single destination, any one of which can be

taken, or like sounds that can be heard from anywhere. Who can really obstruct

them? If one can establish this body in unity with the myriad things, then one

can obtain a passport for the perfect relationship between ruler and minister,

older and the younger brother, and between friends. 40

We can see how closely Yu’s ideas follow the Xi ming. The notion of humanity

united with the myriad things (wanwu yiti zhi ren) is a Lixue ideal. Zhang Zai’s Xi ming,

Wang Yangming’s Daxue wen (Inquiry into Great Learning), and Luo Rufang’s teachings

are all famous and examples of this ideal, which was obviously shared by Yu Chunxi. He

not only adopted this ideal to ground his theory of filial piety, but also held Zhang Zai,

Wang Yangming, and Luo Rufang in great esteem.

Yu praised every word of Zhang Zai’s Xi ming because it bore the marks of

“intelligence and discrimination that could serve heaven and earth” (tianming dicha): a

18
term taken from the Xiaojing that describes the unchangeable truth of filial piety. He

claimed the text embodied the true heritage (zhengchuan) of the Xiaojing. 41 Yu also

praised Wang Yangming’s idea of extending innate knowing, encouraging everybody to

recognize the value of his own mind and innate capacity to act filially. For these reasons,

Wang Yangming was accepted as the true successor of Mencius. In fact, in many late

Ming interpretations of the Xiaojing, the term liangzhi was used as a synonym for filial

piety, and Wang Yangming’s theory of innate knowing was adopted as its explanatory

framework. Scholars often appropriated a similar logic to that found in Wang

Yangming’s theory to articulate the meaning of filial learning and the position of the

Xiaojing. Just as in Wang Yangming’s theory innate knowing served as both the base and

the goal for learning, the innate capacity for filial behavior also served as both the base

and the goal for filial learning. Moreover, for Wang Yangming, extending innate knowing

was both the easiest task to begin and the most difficult to complete: even a sage would

not stop trying to improve. Likewise, a similar logic was applied to the practice of filial

piety. The Xiaojing was both an elementary book for children and an abstruse one that

even an erudite scholar would have difficulty comprehending. 42 These parallels suggest

that there was a close correspondence between the late Ming discourse on filial piety and

Yangming learning—a point that I will return to below.

In sum, Yu Chunxi conceived of xiao as a Spirit participating in both the creation

and governance of the natural and human worlds. Yu believed that the Xiaojing was a

sacred text originally handed down by Confucius after he received inspiration from

heaven. The principle of filial piety is, therefore, is both the foundation of the natural

order and a moral prescription for human society, as well as the key to sagely learning. In

19
addition to the cosmological view of filial piety, Yu also took filial piety to be the

primary criterion in his construction of an orthodox lineage of Chinese civilization,

which extended from Fu Xi’s drawing of the eight diagrams to Wang Yangming’s

teaching on innate knowing. Yu, of course, believed his own interpretation of filial piety

and sagely learning reflected the spirit of orthodox learning.

(2) Reaching the Spirit through the mental cultivation of filial piety

Yu Chunxi believed the Spirit of filial piety could involve itself in human affairs.

His collection of exemplary stories, the Xiaojing jiling, attests to his belief that through

their filial deeds, people could contact and move the Spiritual intelligences (gantong

shenming). Due to his belief in sympathetic resonance and his emphasis on filial piety as

the sole criterion for learning, Yu proposed that the goal of learning should be to reach

and move the Spirit. 43

The Ganying chapter of the Xiaojing says: “Perfect filial piety and fraternal duty

reach to and move the Spiritual intelligences and diffuse their light on all within the four

seas. They penetrate everywhere.” What does the phrase “to reach and move the Spiritual

intelligences” mean? Does it refer to the emperor alone or can it be applied to all

common people? I raise this question here because the late Ming discourse on the

Xiaojing offered two interpretations of this passage, represented on the one hand by Yu

Chunxi and, on the other, by Zhu Hong and Shun Ben.

If we interpret the passage on the basis of internal evidence, within the same

chapter we find the term “ming wang” (sage king), and the Ode to Wenwang (King Wen)

20
in Da ya (Great odes of the Kingdom) is also quoted. Hence the original intent of the

passage probably refers to the effect of governmental influences seen through the

emperor’s filial piety. In any case, this perspective could easily find support from

Confucian political ideology and ritual design. In ancient China, the emperor was

empowered with a special status and ability to communicate with heaven. 44 Within the

entire state, the emperor alone had the power to sacrifice to all the gods. Dukes and

princes could only sacrifice to some gods, according to their status. Common people

were forbidden any right of sacrifice. 45 Since the passage of reaching and moving the

Spirit was linked to the topic of sacrifice, from a Confucian point of view, it would be

reasonable to emphasize the special political influences of the emperor’s filial piety.

This is also supported by many annotations. For example, Xiaojing zhengyi

explains that if an emperor could follow the good advice to cultivate himself and to

fulfill the great nature of filial piety, his morality should be able to reach the Spirit and

empower him to govern. 46 Zhu Hong held a similar view. He explained the theme of this

chapter to be the illumination of “the greatness of the filial piety of a sage king, which is

unobstructed by the realms of life and death.” Shun Ben attributed the pivot of

transformation to the emperor. 47 In general, Ming scholars who emphasized the social

and political function of the Xiaojing were more likely to emphasize the peculiar status

of the emperor. Of course, the annotators did not limit filial obligations to the emperor

per se; since the emperor was the head of the people, people should emulate the

emperor’s behavior. Xiaojing zhengyi explains this point clearly: “This chapter only

mentions the emperor, saying the emperor’s capacity of generating sympathetic

resonance of the Spirit. Other people from the dukes and princes down to commoners

21
should urge themselves to follow this example.” 48

On the other hand, books such as the apocrypha of the Xiaojing, Buddhist and

Daoist texts, local gazetteers, and popular stories like Ershisi xiao (Twenty-four filial

exemplars) contain many stories of common people moving the Spirit through their acts

of filial piety. In his interpretation of the Ganying chapter, Yu Chunxi quoted many

popular stories about the sympathetic resonance between common people and the Spirit

due to their sincere filial piety. 49 He downplayed the role of the emperor somewhat to

emphasize that all people, irrespective of status, could reach the Spirit through their own

acts. This point is also made in his explanation of the following passage: “Formerly the

Duke of Zhou at the border altar sacrificed to Hou Ji as the correlate of heaven, and in

the Brilliant Hall he honored King Wen and sacrificed to him as the correlate of God.” 50

This section had provoked a debate over whether filial piety should be defined by the

Duke of Zhou’s exemplary model, since others were forbidden to perform the sacrifice.

Yu’s interpretation, however, emphasized that rather than concentrate on outward form,

the importance of the ritual should be seen in its meaning: although the forms of ritual

are differentiated by social status, the meaning of the ritual contains no such difference.

If commoners truly grasp the meaning of the ritual, they can serve their fathers as the

correlates of heaven (shi fu pei tian), as well as, reach the Spirit without overstepping

their authority in ritual practice. 51

Yu also explained how filial piety was able to reach the Spirit. The key to obtaining

sympathetic resonance with the Spirit lay with one’s mind. He claimed that every human

being has spiritual intelligence (shenming) which he called innate knowing (liang zhih).

Spiritual intelligence or innate knowing was the only channel by which people could

22
reach the supreme Spirit. Yu said: “Innate knowing is where ghosts and spirits meet.” 52

He believed that a person who fully extended innate knowing would naturally behave

with perfect filial piety and fraternal love, and thereby attain the state of illuminating the

brightness of Taixu, that is, the transcendental substance of the Way. 53

Here we see how Yu's adoption of the theory of innate knowing was close to the

Yangming School’s understanding while altering it somewhat. Like many Yangming

scholars, Yu Chunxi believed innate knowing was the fundamental basis for pursuing the

perfection of life. Through fully extending innate knowing, people could expect to unite

with the Way. However, unlike the left-wing branch of Yangming Learning promoted by

such figures as Wang Ji (1498-1583) and Luo Rufang with whom Yu shared not only

geographical links but also philosophical sympathies, and who trusted in the perfect and

always ready state of innate knowing, Yu actually stressed the imperfect and obscured

state of innate knowing. 54 In other words, although Yu asserted the innate spiritual

intelligence of all human beings, he believed that innate knowing was often obscured and

lost. The only way to recover the spiritual intelligence of innate knowing was through

observing purification (zhaijie). Yu departed from the teachings of Wang Ji and Luo

Rufang who proposed that one follow the natural responses of the mind. Rather, he

advocated a method for dealing with the imperfection of innate knowing through the

practice of examining one’s faults and sinful ideas, a practice deeply influenced by

Buddhism and Daoism that was already popular in late Ming intellectual circles. 55

In Yu’s discourse on filial piety, an important theme was thus how to remove the

55
Wang Fan-sen, “Mingmo Qingchu de renpu yu xingguo hui,” (The manual for men and the associations
for self-examination in the late Ming and early Qing periods), Lishi yuyen yenjiuso jikan 63 (1993), pp.
679-712; Pei-yi Wu, “Self-examination and confession of sins in traditional China,” Harvard Journal of
Asiatic Studies 39: 1 (1979), pp. 5-38.

23
obscurity of innate knowing in order to communicate with the Spirit. Yu articulated this

method of practice in his Quan xiao xin fa (mental practice of devotion to filial piety):

This body is not only derived from my parents, but also derived from heaven and

earth and from Taixu. The method to preserve this derivative body of Taixu is no

more than to control the vital energy and absorb the spirit (yu qi she ling). The key

to controlling vital energy and absorbing the spirit does not exceed the two words,

love (ai) and reverence (jing). The extension of love to the utmost leads to

reverence, and the extension of reverence to the utmost leads to purification (zhai).

When one observes abstinence and purifies his mind to the extent that his vast and

flowing vital energy (haoran zhi qi) fill heaven and earth and his bright light shines

within the four directions, he can achieve the state of perfect filial piety and be

called a filial person. 56

Here, Yu describes step-by-step the mental practice of fulfilling filial piety. He first

mentions the method of “controlling vital energy and absorbing the spirit,” which was

grounded in two natural feelings of human beings—love and reverence, a pair of

concepts that dominates the Xiaojing. According to Yu, love is the natural affection that

children feel for their parents. It is a natural gift of love and a demonstration of innate

knowing. Reverence is a more serious attitude of respect for parents that children learn as

they mature; it is the basis of ritual and social order. Yu said that both feelings were

natural endowments, differing only in the way that spring and fall are different seasons.

56
Yu Chunxi, “Quanxiao xin fa,” in Xiaojing zonglei, shen ji, p. 169.

24
Therefore ancient sages taught people that love and reverence were based on people’s

natural feelings, without either a distorting or forcing of human nature. 57 These two

feelings, however, are not equivalent to each other. Yu said: “Reverence can encompass

love, but love cannot encompass reverence;” “the extension of love to the utmost leads to

reverence; the extension of reverence to the utmost leads to purification.” 58 Accordingly,

Yu prescribed a clear method of cultivation that started with the natural affection that

children feel toward parents and ended with the purification of the mind, but not without

paying attention to various kinds of behavioral abstinence.

As for the practice of purification, Yu conceived of it mainly based on the Liji (The

Record of Rites). The link between the Xiaojing and the Liji was not unique to Yu's

thinking; the similarity between the two texts had already been noticed by others. How to

explain the textual similarities and how to position these two texts within the Confucian

Classics was a question Yu needed to address. Yu’s attitude followed a tradition that

defended the canonical position of the Xiaojing and argued that it proposed a broad set of

guidelines, while the Liji provided ritual details. The prescriptions of the Liji thus

became an important source for interpreting the Xiaojing, especially those passages

about rituals and purification. This is exactly the format of Yu Chunxi’s “Zhaijie shiqin

zhi mu” (The contents of purification for serving parents). In this text Yu quoted passages

about abstinence and purification from the Liji and added his own annotations. 59

Yu believed that the general format of ancient purification practices was preserved

in the Liji, though other scholars often thought it had been lost. Following the

prescriptions of the Liji, Yu then said that purification was comprised of two parts:

57
Yu Chunxi, Xiaojing eryen, in Xiaojing zonglei, shen ji, p. 177.
58
Yu Chunxi, Xiaojing eryen, in Xiaojing zonglei, shen ji, p. 174, 179; also see “Quanxiao xin fa.”

25
namely, to abstain from certain behaviors (shenjie), and to purify the mind (xinzhai). One

important example comes from the Jitong chapter of the Liji, which describes in detail

the process of abstinence and purification:

When the time came for offering a sacrifice, the man wisely gave himself to

the work of purification. That purification meant the production of uniformity (in

all the thoughts); it was the giving uniformity to all that was not uniform, till a

uniform direction of the thoughts was realized. Hence a superior man, unless for

a great occasion, and unless he were animated by a great reverence, did not

attempt this purification. While it was not attained, he did not take precautions

against the influence of (outward) things, nor did he cease from all (internal)

desires. But when he was about to attempt it, he guarded against all things of an

evil nature, and suppressed all his desires. His ears did not listen to music;—as it

is said in the Record, “People occupied with purification have no music,”

meaning that they did not venture to allow its dissipation of their minds. He

allowed no vain thoughts in his heart, but kept them in a strict adherence to what

was right. He allowed no reckless movement of his hands or feet, but kept them

firmly in the way of propriety. Thus the superior man, in his purification, devotes

himself to carrying to its utmost extent his refined and intelligent virtue.

Therefore there were the looser ordering of the mind for seven days, to bring it

to a state of fixed determination; and the complete ordering of it for three days, to

effect the uniformity of all the thoughts. That determination is what is called

59
Yu Chunxi, “Zhaijie shiqin zhi mu,” in Xiaojing zonglei, shen ji, pp. 184-186.

26
 purification; the final attainment is when the highest degree of refined

intelligence is reached. After this it was possible to enter into communion with

the spiritual intelligences. 60

Yu considered this paragraph to be a means of leading people to pursue union with the

Way while abiding by the rites. He praised it as a beacon of the central theme and

method of sagely learning. 61

Yu next explained the relationship between observing purification and reaching the

Spirit, as well as the position of purification in daily life. He did not believe that

sympathetic resonance immediately follows every action. He said, “Today there are

people who abandon their parents’ houses to seclude themselves for several years; they

suppose that they have purified their minds and wonder why no resonance happens. This

problem arose because we have lost the ancient practice of purification.” 62 Based on the

Liji, Yu continued to explain that the so-called “one period of purification,” meant, for

ancient people, a ten-day period of intensive practice. 63 If one faithfully followed the

ancient practice of purification before each sacrificial rite, then every year more than one

hundred days would be devoted to such observances. This would account only for

regular sacrifices; if irregular sacrifices, such as observing mourning, were counted, then

the days for purification would increase.

Yu also presented an educational perspective on the issue. He said that in ancient

times, a boy began his elementary education at eight, entered secondary school at fifteen,

60
James Legge, Li Chi (Book of Rites) (New York: University Books, 1967), vol. 2, pp. 239-240.
61
Yu Chunxi, Xiaojing eryen, in Xiaojing zonglei, shen ji, p. 185.
62
Yu Chunxi, Xiaojing eryen, in Xiaojing zonglei, shen ji, p. 182.
63
Yu Chunxi, Xiaojing eryen, in Xiaojing zonglei, shen ji, p. 182.

27
and probably started his official service around forty years of age. After nurturing his

mind over this extended period of cultivation and education, his mental state should be

able to reach the Spirit; how could there not be sympathetic resonance? In Yu’s words,

“The auspicious things mentioned above, such as sweet dew and spiritual spring, are

only examples of sympathetic resonance. Liji expounds upon the meaning of calmness

(ding) and tranquility (ning), which clearly point to the purification in mind.” 64 Here Yu

did not emphasize any peculiar mental state or rare mystical experience to reach the

Spirit, but rather a mental state resulting from long-term education and constant

cultivation. In other words, Yu proposed a normal life-style and educational program for

fulfilling filial piety, in which mind cultivation would be crucial.

In sum, Yu Chunxi’s ideas about filial piety and his annotations of the Xiaojing

represented an important dimension of late Ming Xiaojing discourse. Departing from the

socio-political perspective that emphasized governing the state by filial piety, Yu stressed

the sympathetic resonance that arose between the Spirit and human beings through filial

acts. Filial piety was elevated to the level of cosmology; Yu saw in filial piety the natural

order of the universe and human society. It was also the key to great harmony and a

perfect personal life, as well as good government. This more cosmologically-oriented

discourse could form an alliance with more mundane views of filial piety, but it tended to

stress cultivation for personal purposes and displayed the characteristics of religious

concerns. The method of practice that Yu proposed privileged mental cultivation, in

congruence with the practices of contemporary Neo-Confucianism, Buddhism, and

Daoism.

64
Yu Chunxi, Xiaojing eryen, in Xiaojing zonglei, shen ji, p. 182.

28
 The cultural context of Yu’s ideas and its relation to Yangming
Learning

The main purpose of this section is to demonstrate the close relationship between

Yu Chunxi’s thought and Yangming learning. Before discussing this topic, a few points

need to be clarified. First, as we have seen, in terms of thought alone, Yu Chunxi’s ideas

about filial piety were not entirely original, nor did they belong to the Confucian

tradition alone. Yu’s interpretations echoed the annotations of the Xiaojing in previous

dynasties, especially the apocrypha of the Xiaojing and various texts produced during a

long process of syncretism among Buddhism, Daoism, and Confucianism. Although I

think it is important to recognize the long history of textual and cultural influences, the

topic is beyond the scope of this paper. The main point here is that although Yu retrieved

and advocated some previous ideas, he nonetheless created a new mixture of cultural

images and meanings. The significance of this within contemporary late Ming thought

should be taken into account.

Second, we also need to take proper account of the religious syncretism of the late

Ming. Since Yu Chunxi deeply immersed himself in multiple religious cultures, it was

logical for his discourse on filial piety to display influences of Daoism, Buddhism, and

other religions, even though the Xiaojing is conventionally thought of as a Confucian

classic. Indeed, Yu’s discourse on the Xiaojing is a wonderful example of the syncretism

and populism of late Ming culture. However, my purpose in this paper is not to define

the various intellectual “lineages” that “influenced” Yu’s ideas, if only because an effort

29
to trace philosophical, religious, or cultural origins would require more space than is

available in this article lest it be trapped by an illusory drawing of boundaries. Again, the

main issue here is not Yu’s thought in itself but how his discourse on filial piety reflected

and contributed to the late Ming ethos. Therefore, although I have pointed out textual

resonances with apocrypha of the Xiaojing above, and below will suggest some close

correspondences between Yu’s discourse and that of the religions, the critical question is

not to what religious sect(s) we should consign Yu but rather, how do we define the

cultural milieu that made possible Yu’s style of thought and practice.

Before I address the topic of this section, I offer a very sketchy description of the

long-term and complicated cultural context in which Yu’s discourse developed. Many of

Yu’s ideas about filial piety and his belief in the sacred power of the Xiaojing can be

found in Han and Six Dynasties arguments concerning the Xiaojing tradition. 65 There are

many historical records which indicate that the Xiaojing was used as a religious text; for

example, people recited the text for curing diseases or had the text buried with the

dead. 66 Yoshikawa Tadao has studied this phenomenon and analyzed its relation to the

impact of Buddhism. 67 Since Yu Chunxi's Xiaojing jiling was a collection of previous

texts of this kind, he was definitely familiar with these historical records. The link

65
Xu Xingwu, Chenwei wenxian yu handai wenhua goujian (Texts of prognostication and apocrypha and
the construction of the Han-Dynasty culture), (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 2003); Zhong Zhaopeng, Chenwei
lunlue; Leng Dexi, Zhaoyue Shenghua, pp. 186-192; 265-279.
66
For example, Zhang Rong had the Xiaojing buried with him. Huang Kan recited the Xiaojing daily and
viewed it very much like the Kuanshiyin Sutra. Xu Fen kneeled down to recite the Xiaojing earnestly in
order to cure his father’s disease. Gu Huan cured disease by using the Xiaojing. See Xiao Zixian, Nan Qi
shu (History of the Southern Qi Dynasty), (Taipei: Dinwen shuju, 1990), juan 41, p 729; Yao Silian, Liang
shu (History of the Liang Dynasty), (Taipei: Dinwen shuju, 1990), juan 48, p. 680; Yao Silian, Chen shu
(History of the Chen Dynasty), (Taipei: Dinwen shuju, 1985), juan 26, p. 336; Li Yenshou, Nan shi
(History of the Southern Dynasties), (Taipei: Dinwen shuju, 1958), juan 75, p. 1875.
67
Yoshikawa Tadao,” Richuchō jidai ni okeiru kōkyō no juyō” (Reception of the Xiaojing during the Six
Dynasties), in Rikuchō seishinshi kenkyū (Intellectual history of the Six Dynasties), (Kyoto: Dōhōsha ,
1984), pp. 547-567.

30
between Yu’s ideas and these historical precedents, therefore, should be recognized.

Furthermore, both Buddhism and Daoism had increased their emphasis on and

development of their own doctrines of filial piety in a dialogue with Confucianism. 68

During this centuries-long dialogue, the doctrine of filial piety had become synthesized

so that it shared common features in all three teachings, though without obscuring their

distinct doctrines. The Xiaojing text had come to occupy an important position in both

Buddhist and Daoist cultures; its arguments for filial piety shaped both religions. A

substantial amount of research has already been done on this issue that need not be

repeated here. A few well known examples will suffice to show the precedents available

to Yu and other late Ming scholars.

Several Chinese Buddhist apocryphal sutras emphasize filial piety; one of these, the

Yulanpen jing (The ghost festival sutra), 69 was compared to the Xiaojing by Zong Mi

(780-841). The Yulanpen jing remained popular in a ritual performance dedicated to filial

68
The role of filial piety in Chinese Buddhism is an important topic in the field of Buddhist Studies. See,
for example, Kenneth K. S. Ch’en, “Filial Piety in Chinese Buddhism,” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies
28 (1968), pp. 81-97; Michihata Ryōshū, Chōgoku bukkyō to jukyō rinri kō to no kōshō (Tokyo: Shoen,
1985). Both Kenneth Ch’en and Michihata Ryōshū emphasize the Chinese impact on Buddhism that made
Chinese Buddhists value filial piety. Gregory Schopen proposed a revision to this view, pointing out that
filial piety was already present in Indian Buddhism and would have been transmitted to China along with
other Indian ideas. See Gregory Schopen, “Filial piety and the monks in the practices of Indian Buddhism:
a question of ‘Sincization’ view from the other side,” Toung Pao 70 (1984), pp. 110-126. Also see Ran
Yunhua, “Zhongguo fojiao dui xiaodao de shourong ji houkuo” (The reception and development of filial
piety in Chinese Buddhism) in Cong yindu fojiao dao zhongguo fojiao (From Indian Buddhism to Chinese
Buddhism), (Taipei: Dunda tushu, 1995), pp. 43-55; Gu Zhengmei, “Dasheng fojiao xiaokuan de fazhen
beijing,” (The developmental background of the ideas about filial piety in the Great Vehicle of Buddhism)
in Fu Weixun, ed., Cong chuantong dao xiandai: fojiao lunli yu xiandai shehui (From tradition to the
modern: Buddhism and the modern society), (Taipei: Dongda tushu, 1990), pp. 61-105; Wang Yueqing,
Zhongguo fojiao lunli sixiang (The ethical thought in Chinese Buddhism), (Taipei: Yunlung chubanshe,
2001); Ye Luhua, Zhongguo fojiao lunli sixiang (The ethical thought in Chinese Buddhism), (Shanghai:
Shanghai shihui kexueyuan chubanshe, 2000). For filial piety in Daoist tradition, see Zhou Xipo, “Daojiao
wenxian zhong xiaodao wenxue yenjiu” (Study on the Daoist literature about filial piety) (Master thesis,
Wenhua University, 1995).
69
For the date of the composition of the Yulanpen Sutra, some scholars postulate Indian or central Asian
authorship around 400 AD, while others suggest that the texts were put together in China in the early 6th
century. See Stephen Teiser, The Ghost Festival in Medieval China (Princeton: Princeton University Press,
1988), pp. 48-49. For other Chinese apocryphal texts on filial piety, see Alan Cole, Mothers and Sons in

31
piety which began in the sixth century. 70 Qi Song (1008-1072) adopted quite a few ideas

from the Xiaojing to articulate his own thoughts on filial piety in his Xiaolun (On filial

piety). 71 During the late Ming, Zhuhong even advocated filial piety as a requisite to

observing precepts and Buddhist cultivation. 72 In the Daoist tradition, the emphasis on

filial piety and the production of Daoist apocrypha texts on filial piety was similar. There

was a Daoist sect, Zongxiao jingming dao, established during the Southern Song, which

not only took filial piety as its doctrinal core, but also created three gods of filial piety

who handed down the teachings of filial piety to people and possessed powers of

surveillance and retribution. 73 This sect, especially after it was reformed by Liu Yu

(1257-1308) and his disciples during the Yuan, became popular among the literati and

was, to a certain degree, Confucianized. Its religious practice emphasized cultivation of

the mind and bore strong resemblance to Lixue practices. 74 Moreover, Yu Chunxi wrote

about this sect and its legendary stories. 75 From all these examples, we can see that a

significant number of cultural contexts lay behind Yu’s views on filial piety. The details

of this these background discourses remain subject to futher research; here, I focus on the

Chinese Buddhism (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1998).

70
Zong Mi, Foshuo yulanpen jing shu (Commentary on the ghost gestival sutra), (Taipei: Xinwenfeng,
1987); Stephen F. Teiser, The Ghost Festival in Medieval China. Also see the articles presented in
http://www.mahayana.us/sutra/books/1105.htm#a14.
71
Qi Song, Xiaolun, in Fujiao bian (Collection on the supplement to teaching), (Taipei: Xinwenfeng,
1991), vol. 2, pp. 577-584.
72
For Zhu Hong’s advocacy of filial piety in his teaching, see Araki Kengo, Jinshi Zhongguo fojiao de
shukuang: Yunqi Zhu Hong zhi yanjiu; Wang Yueqing, Zhongguo fojiao lunli sixiang, pp. 178-183.
73
Liu Chunren, “Xu xun yu Lan kong,” in Shijie zongjiao yenjiu, no. 3 (1995), pp. 40-59. Qing Xitai, Zhan
Shichuang, “Jingming dao xintan,” in Shanghai Daojiao, no. 1 (1988), pp. 10-16; Qing Xitai ed. Zhongguo
daojiao shi (A history of Chinese Daoism) vol. 2 (Chengdu: Sichuan renming chubanshe, 1993), pp.
649-652; Huang Xiaoshi, Jingming dao yenjiu (Studies on Jingming Daoist sect), (Chengdu: Bashu shushe,
1999).
74
Liu Yu summarized the method of his practice in thirty words, see Huang Yuanji ed., Jingming
zhongxiao quanshu (Completed works of the Jingming Zhongxiao Sect), (Taipei: Xinwenfeng, 1985), juan
3, pp. 1-2.
75
Yu Chunxi, Xiaojing jiling, in Xiaojing zonglei, hai ji, p. 311. Yang Qiyuan also mentioned this Daoist
sect, see Yang Qiyuan, Xiaojing yinzhen (Drawing evidence for the Xiaojing), (Taipei: Yiwen shuju, 1965),

32
relationship between Yu’s ideas about filial piety and contemporary Yangming learning.

As shown above, Yu Chunxi was sympathetic to the ideas of both Zhang Zai and

Wang Yangming. In terms of his contemporary intellectual world, Yu’s thought was

closest to that of the circle of scholars surrounding Luo Rufang. Yu claimed that in the

few years before Luo died, the two of them became intimate friends. Luo, who died in

1588, visited Qiantang around 1586 and it is likely that they met then. 76 Yu explained

that Luo, impressed by Yu’s interpretation of filial piety, had wanted to meet him. After

hearing from a friend of Yu about Yu’s interpretation, Luo immediately replied: “I must

meet this person.” 77 After seeing each other, they felt like old friends and exchanged

ideas about their learning. Yu described their first meeting:

Together, we lifted up our heads to observe the universe and closely shared the

heritage and learning of our families. We expounded the same origin of the

feelings of sadness and happiness and explored similar trends in Daoism and

Buddhism. We extracted the hidden messages and presented significant

meanings. We arranged to travel together to Yuzhang and treated each other as

intimate friends. 78

p. 4a.
76
Cheng Yu-Ying, Wanming bai yiwang de sixiangjia:Luo Rufang shiwen shiji biennian (A chronological
biography of Lou Rufang: poet, philosopher, activist), (Taipei: Kuangwen shuju, 1995), pp. 152-153. Yu
Chunxi also recorded that in 1585 he was greatly inspired by Luo’s teaching about the need never to
neglect cultivation. This may indicate either that they met in late 1585, although it is also possible that Yu
had familiarized himself with Luo’s thought before they met. See Yu Chunxi, “Yu Wang Hongtai xianfu,”
Yu Deyuan xiansheng ji, juan 25, p. 24a. For Yu’s veneration of Luo’s ideas, also see Yu Chunxi, “Zhang
Zishao xinzhanlu xu,” (Preface to Zhang Zishao’s Xinzhanlu), Yu Deyuan xiansheng ji, juan 3, pp.
23a-25b.
77
Yu Chunxi, “Luo Jinxi xiansheng ji xu,” (Preface to the collected works of Luo Rufang), Yu Deyuan
xiansheng ji, juan 3, pp. 20b-23a.

33
 Luo Rufang’s thought was grounded in his understanding of the natural affections

of filial piety, and fraternal and parental love (xiao di ci) as the manifestation of one’s

innate knowing or human nature endowed by heaven. Luo wrote a vivid description of

his own experience of learning and enlightenment. Luo tells us that he was raised in a

very warm and intimate family setting. At a very young age, his mother instructed him in

the Xiaojing, Xiaoxue, Analects, and Mencius; his grandfather, father, uncles, and cousins

all helped him to learn the great teachings of the sages. Nonetheless, by fifteen, he had

already strayed from this natural and easy way of learning and resolved to follow only

sagely learning. He recalls that the more seriously he dedicated himself to learning and

the more deeply he looked into himself, the more despicable he found common people

and this vain world. He pursued sagely learning from a lofty stance with painstaking care

to such a degree that he made himself ill. After a chance encounter with Yan Jun

(1504-1596), who instructed him to cultivate intimate humanity (tijen) instead of

subduing desire (zhiyu), he shifted his practice and finally experienced enlightenment.

Soon Luo began to realize the narrow-minded mistakes of his previous views and started

to expound the natural response and profound meaning of filial piety and fraternal and

parental love that he had experienced in his own life. Finally, he realized that the true

foundation of sagely learning lies in everyone’s own nature; this nature is the same for

both elites and commoners and is demonstrated in the natural affections between parents

and children. With this realization, Luo not only began to see his own ordinariness, but

also to deepen his understanding of the greatness, encompassing nature, and eternally

engendering power of the Dao. This also helped him to develop his cosmological

78
Yu Chunxi, “Luo Jinxi xiansheng ji xu,” Yu Deyuan xiansheng ji, juan 3, pp. 20b-23a.

34
understanding of filial piety and fraternal love. 79

The mandate of heaven is never-ending. It continually engenders. [The

bloodline] is passed down from parents, to oneself and on to one’s sons,

grandsons, great-grandsons, and great-great-grandsons. Parents, brothers, and

all descendents embody this ever-lasting heavenly mandate, and this mandate is

the quintessence of filial piety, and fraternal and parental love (xiao di ci). From

a synchronic perspective, this relationship links the ancient past to the present;

from a diachronic perspective, it constitutes families, the state, and all

institutions under heaven. 80

Moreover, Luo Rufang tried to unify the Confucian classics based on his new

insight on the importance of filial piety. He expounded the meaning of the Great

Learning and viewed filial piety, fraternal love, and parental love as innate brilliant

intelligence (mingde). Innate knowing is the foundation of both self-cultivation and the

government of the state. 81 He used his own views on filial piety to interpret the central

teachings of Confucius and Mencius and to highlight the harmonious unity of the myriad

things in the spirit of love and reverence. According to Luo:

The incipient mind of Confucius’s resolve in learning and the determinant ideas

of Mencius’s dedication to learning both refer to a continually engendering

79
Luo Rufang, Xujiang Luo Jinxi xiansheng quanji (Complete works of Luo Rufang of Xujiang), juan 2,
pp. 4a-7a.
80
Luo Rufang, Xujiang Luo Jinxi xiansheng quanji, juan 2, pp. 5a-b.
81
Luo Rufang, Xujiang Luo Jinxi xiansheng quanji, juan 1, p. 27b, pp. 33b-34a, 44a.

35
 spirit in the creation of the cosmos. Heaven is within me, and I am within

heaven. The innate love and reverence that is possessed by every newly born

baby are bestowed on me and others, with no differentiation…. Moreover,

Confucius passed down this text of the Xiaojing to Zeng Zi and Zi Si, then to

Mencius. Mencius, following the master’s teaching of filial piety, and the

fraternal and parental love found in the Daxue and Zhongyong, also elaborated

on them in seven masterpieces about humanity and righteousness. 82

In sum, Luo viewed filial piety and fraternal love as natural human feelings; as the

manifestation of one’s innate knowing; and as the basis for learning and for the operation

of human society. 83 These views stemmed from Luo’s interpretation of Wang

Yangming’s theory of innate knowing. On the one hand, Luo’s interpretation included the

common people within the scope of sagely learning. On the other, it embraced a lofty

ideal of unification between the myriad things and the Dao, and it emphasized the

importance of personal spiritual pursuit. 84 Hence Luo’s ideas about filial piety were more

than mere ethical injunction; his understanding of filial piety often included references to

unifying with the Dao through self-cultivation.

In light of the above, we can draw some conclusions about the similarities and

differences between Luo Rufang’s and Yu Chunxi’s ideas of filial piety. Although Luo

did not call filial piety a Spirit as Yu had, he did speak of filial piety as equivalent to the

82
Luo Rufang, Xujiang Luo Jinxi xiansheng quanji, juan 1, pp. 9b-10a.
83
For further examples of Luo’s comments on filial piety, see Luo Rufang, Xujiang Luo Jinxi xiansheng
quanji, juan 1, p. 27b, 33b-34a, 44a, also see Yang Qiyuan, ed., Xiaojing zongzhi, in Shouxiao sanshu
(Three texts on filial piety), (Shanghai: Wenmin shuju, 1922), p. 1a.
84
For Luo Rufang’s thought, see Miaw-fen Lu, Yangming xue shiren shequn (The Wang Yangming school
during the Ming Dynasty), (Taipei: Institute of Modern History, Academia Sinica, 2003), pp. 327-368.

36
Dao. In some passages, Luo also referred to the inspection of the mandate of heaven. 85

Although Luo did not say filial piety existed before the cosmic creation as Yu did, he did

view filial piety as a natural law ascribed to all human beings. He believed that society

could achieve real harmony and peace only if social order was based on natural

affections like filial piety and fraternal love.86

Furthermore, Luo, like Yu understood filial piety as a cosmological body that

unifies human beings with the Dao. Luo encouraged his audience to think about

themselves as babies in their mothers’ womb and how profound their relationship is with

both their mothers and with heaven and earth. He believed that people would grasp the

mind of heaven and earth if they thought about the moment of their birth and returned to

this original mind (chizi zhi xin). 87 Luo, therefore, rendered filial piety as the right

mental state to cultivate when one faces the cosmos. He focused primarily on the mental

cultivation of love and reverence.

In addition to Yu Chunxi’s account, in fleshing out the close relationship between

Yu and the circle of scholars surrounding Luo, we find more evidence in the work of

Yang Qiyuan (1547-1599), a famous late Ming scholar and disciple of Luo. Yang was a

native of Guangdong province and attained the jinshi degree in 1577. In the same year,

he formally became a disciple of Luo, and thereafter remained faithful to Luo. In 1587

Yang went to Chonggu Mountain, in Jiangxi province, to receive further instructions

from Luo. 88 After Luo died, Yang hung a portrait of Luo in his house and each morning

85
Luo Rufang, Xujiang Luo Jinxi xiansheng quanji, juan 1, pp. 39b-40a.
86
For example, see Yang Qiyuan, Xiaojing zongzhi, p. 1a.
87
Yang Qiyuan, Xiaojing zongzhi, p. 1a.
88
Wu Daonan, “Ming libu youshilang Yang Fusuo xiansheng muzhiming,” in Wu Wenke gong wenji
(Collected works of Wu Daonan), (Beijng: Beijing chubanshi, 2000), juan 17, pp. 21a-27a; Zou Yuanbiao,
“Jiayi daifu libu soshilang jian lanlinyuan shidu xueshi Zhenfu Yang kong Qiyuan zhuan,” in Xienzhen lu
(Collected biographical writings), juan 26, pp. 75a-77b.

37
and evening he paid homage, reporting to Luo. 89 Yang also regularly recited the records

of Luo’s teachings. 90 Gu Xiancheng described Yang’s feeling toward his master thus:

“Yang Fusuo (i.e., Qiyuan) thinks Luo Jinxi a sage.”91

Through his continual rereading of the master’s works, Yang Qiyuan came to

realize the great importance of Luo’s teachings about humanity and filial piety. In 1590,

three years after Luo’s death, he combined selections from both the Xiaojing and Luo’s

writings on filial piety to compose a text titled Xiaojing zongzhi (Essential theme of the

Xiaojing). 92 In fact, the composition of Xiaojing zongzhi should be seen as Yang’s

interpretation of Luo’s ideas. Luo did treat filial piety as an important theme in his

thought and did try to link the Confucian classics as one, but the selections chosen by

Yang for Xiaojing zongzhi had not been initially used by Luo to explicate the Xiaojing. In

other words, Luo’s thought did provide the potential philosophical ground for Yang’s

interpretation, but it was through Yang’s interpretation that Luo’s words became closely

aligned with the Xiaojing text itself rather than simply more general notions of filial

piety.

Yang Qiyuan had a particular interest in the Xiaojing. He not only annotated the

text, 93 but also published the Xiaojing and tried to promote the learning of it when he

served as an education official in National University at southern metropolitan (Nan zhili)

89
See the biography written by Zhou Yuanbiao, in Xienzhen lu, juan 26, pp. 75a-77b.
90
Yang Qiyuan, “Li Wentang,” Yang taishi jiacang wenji (Family stored collected writings of Yang
Qiyuan), (1619 version, copy in the Fu Sinian Library, Academia Sinica), juan 6, pp. 23a-b.
91
Ku Xiancheng, Xiaoxin zhai daji (Notes from the Study of Watchfulness), (Taipei: Kuangwen shuju,
1975), p. 2b.
92
Later Yang Qiyuan compiled another two books: Renxun (On humanity) and Xiaoxun (On filial piety).
Yang Qiyuan, “Shu Xiaojing zongzhi,” “Renxiao xun xu,” in Taishi Yang Fuso xiansheng zhengxue bian
(Compilation of verified learning, by Yang Qiyuan), juan 4, pp. 5b-6a; pp. 10b-11a. For the year of Yang’s
compilation, see Cheng Yu-Ying, Wanming bai yiwang de sixiangjia, p. 180.
93
Yang Qiyuan, Xiaojing Kuangyi (Broad meanings of the Xiaojing) (published in 1700, stored in
Shanghai Library).

38
during the 1590s. 94 Like Yu Chunxi, in his Xiaojing yinzheng (Drawing evidence for the

Xiaojing), Yang adopted the Liji to interpret some passages of the Xiaojing. He also

abbreviated Yu Chunxi’s Xiaojing jiling and combined it with the Xiaojing and his own

Xiaojing yinzheng to compile Shuoxiao sanshu (Three texts on filial piety). This text was

published by another of Luo’s disciples, Nie Hong, who was then serving as magistrate

of Suqian District. 95 As an education official and famous scholar, Yang’s promotion of

the learning of filial piety through his edited works and sponsorship of publication

wielded great influence and rendered him one of the most recognizable figures in

advocating the learning of the Xiaojing in the late Ming.

Compared to Luo Rufang’s views, Yang Qiyuan’s ideas of filial piety and his

emphasis on the Xiaojing text itself were much closer to Yu Chunxi. From Yang’s

collected works, we can easily find many passages that are similar to Yu’s. For example,

like Yu, Yang believed that the Xiaojing was a sacred text and that the Spirit could be

reached by reciting the text, no matter what one’s social status was. Those who recited

the text sincerely could move the Spirit. He also said that in terms of sympathetic

resonance the Xiaojing was more effective than Buddhist and Daoist texts. From this

comparison, we can conclude that Yang conceived of the Xiaojing as a religious ritual

text. 96

Yang also wrote more about the spiritual and sympathetic resonance of filial piety

than did Luo Rufang. Yang said that the Spirit prevailed in the universe and it could be

respectfully referred to as tian (heaven) or more intimately, with the term xin (mind).

94
See Yu Chunxi, “Ho Xiangming wulin dezheng shi xu,” Yu Deyuan xiansheng ji, juan 3, p. 32a.
95
Yang Qiyuan, “Xiaojing xu,” (Preface to Xiaojing), Taishi Yang Fuso xiansheng zhengxue bian, juan 4, p.
4b. For Nie Hong’s biography, see Li Defu, ed., Suqian xian zhi (A gazetteer of Suqian province), (Taipei:
Chengwen chubanshe, 1974), juan 4, pp. 11a-b; juan 16, p. 6a.

39
Yang also claimed that human beings were the derivative bodies of Taixu and that filial

piety was the natural order for both the natural and human worlds. He said the creator

responds to human beings in the same way a loving mother responds to her child. 97 Yang

was also deeply immersed in the Three Teachings. We can see his identity with

Buddhism through his calling himself a monk (biqiu) in the Zhujing pinjie, which

consisted of twenty-nine Buddhist and Daoist texts that Yang edited. 98 Furthermore, we

have seen how he based his interpretation of the Xiaojing on the Liji as did Yu. Yang’s

interpretation of the practice of purification as well as his comments on Zhang Zai’s Xi

ming are all very similar to Yu Chunxi. 99

However, Yang Qiyuan was not merely repeating Yu’s ideas; his interpretation also

moved in new directions. In one article, “Shijie bian xu” (Preface to a compilation of

vowing to observe precept), Yang elaborated on the idea of filial piety based on the

Xiaojing and used it to support the ideal of not killing. Expanding upon the idea found in

the Xiaojing that filial piety begins with not hurting oneself, Yang said that to value one’s

own life was a characteristic shared by all sentient beings. This common feeling proved

that there was unity among all sentient beings, and this unity served as the basis of

sympathetic resonance with the Spirit. Yang also attributed the main difference between

human beings and animals to filial feeling (xiao si). According to Yang, filial feeling

could be developed into the capacity of nurturing things and was only possessed by

human beings. If one can fully develop his filial feeling, one should be able to realize

that the origin of his life was shared by all sentient beings and will never kill. In opening

96
Yang Qiyuan, “Xiaojing xu,” Taishi Yang Fusuo xiansheng zhengxue bian, juan 4, pp. 3a-b.
97
Yang Qiyuan, Taishi Yang Fusuo xiansheng zhengxue pian, juan 1, pp. 6a-b, 9b-10a.
98
Yang Qiyuan, Zhujing pinjie (Tainan: Zhuangyen wenhua shiye, 1995).
99
Yang Qiyuan, Xiaojing yinzheng (Shanghai: Mingwen shuju, 1922), pp. 2a-b, 3b-4a.

40
his argument with an idea taken from the Xiaojing and then incorporating the Buddhist

ideal of not killing, we see how eloquently Yang constructed his argument and how his

ideas resonated with both Luo’s and Yu’s ideas even while Yang gave the text his unique

interpretation. 100

Sanjing xu (Preface to the three canons), in which Yang pieced together three texts

respectively from the Three Teachings—Xiaojing, Daodejing, and Yuanjuejing (The

perfect enlightenment sutra)—serves as another example of his syncretistic approach.

Yang tried to link the three texts by explaining the different intellectual contexts that had

produced them. He assumed that the Xiaojing was composed by Confucius who adopted

a positive narrative to deliver the message that filial piety begins with caring for one’s

body and not hurting it. Yang argued that the Daodejing was produced in a later period,

when people began to stick to the literary meaning of “loving one’s body.” Laozi, Yang

thought, adopted a critical stance for rectifying the incorrect craving for the body and

taught: “He puts his own person last, and yet it is found in the foremost place; he treats

his person as if it were foreign to him, and yet that person is preserved.” 101 And the last

teaching came from Buddhism, which taught the attainment of nirvana by revealing the

delusion of body and mind as well as the delusive stubbornness of love and hatred. Yang

basically viewed Buddhist ideals as the loftiest of the three approaches and offering the

best solution; nonetheless, he concluded that the Three Teachings were identical in their

emphasis on loving oneself (ai shen). He argued, “if one could truly eliminate delusion,

one could become detached from himself (wai shen); if one could truly become detached

from the self, one could love people.” “Since there is neither hatred nor love, one should

100
Yang Qiyuan, “Shijie pien xu,” Taishi Yang Fuso xiansheng zhengxue bian, juan 4, pp. 35b-36b.
101
A phrase quoted from Ch. 7 of Daodejing, translation by James Legge, in The Texts of Taoism (New

41
be able to achieve equality and love; once one is not subject to death, this is the perfect

state of neither hurting nor harm.” Loving oneself (one’s body), the basic teaching in the

Xiaojing, Yang claimed, is precisely what the Three Teachings had in common. Here,

Yang obviously tried to synthesize the teachings of the three texts and find common

ground among the Three Teachings based on themes found in the Xiaojing. His efforts

reflected the important role the Xiaojing played in his own thought. 102

This way of understanding filial piety was also promoted by another Yangming

scholar, Yang Dongming (1548-1624), whose ideas were greatly influenced by Yang

Qiyuan. Yang Dongming also said that human beings were derived from heaven and

earth, so one should revere and purify oneself to fulfill filial piety. He praised the

greatness of filial piety and said: “Filial piety is always coexistence with the Dao….

There is nowhere without it.” 103 Similarly, he considered filial piety more than just an

ethical obligation; he also advocated abiding in the Dao. And for the practice of filial

piety, he also emphasized mental cultivation and rendered it according to the formula

found in the Liji. 104 His ideas are quite similar to those of Luo Rufang, Yang Qiyuan, and

Yu Chunxi, and further demonstrate the close relationship between the ideas about filial

piety held by Yu on the one hand and Luo’s circle of scholars on the other.

Concluding Remarks

A discourse on the Xiaojing that was essentially religious in nature developed

York: Julian, 1959), p. 100.

102
Yang Qiyuan, “Sanjin xu,” in Taishi Yang Fuso xiansheng zhengxue bian, juan 3, pp. 34a-36a.
103
Yang Dongming, Shanju gongke, juan 8, p. 11b.
104
Yang Dongming, Shanju gongke, juan 6, p. 10a, 37a, pp. 34b-35a.

42
during the late Ming. This discourse was closely related to the contemporary syncretism

of the Three Teachings, and its central figure was Yu Chunxi. Yu promoted filial piety in

terms that transcended mere ethical relations, treating it instead as a Spirit and indeed as

the primal principle of the natural order and human civilization. He believed that it was

possible to communicate with the Spirit, which was intimately involved in human affairs,

through true acts of filial piety. He therefore proposed the “mental practice of devotion of

filial piety” as key to filial acts, a practice he grounded in the Liji emphasizing long-term

constant cultivation in ways that were similar to the practices of mind cultivation found

in the Lixue, Buddhism, and Daoism of the day. Yu also expressed his vision of the

transmission Chinese civilization by the sole criterion of filial piety.

Yet if Yu was central to a project of defining the religious implication of filial piety,

analysis of the context of Yu’s thought not only reveals Yu’s debts to earlier religious

interpretations of the Xiaojing during the Han and Six Dynasties—as well as similar

concepts of filial piety in both Buddhist and Daoist traditions—but it also demonstrates

the close relationship between Yu’s thought and contemporary Yangming Confucianism,

especially to the ideas of Luo Rufang and Yang Qiyuan.

Furthermore, we should note that Yu Chunxi’s and Yang Qiyuan’s works about the

Xiaojing were later brought to Japan and had great influence on Nakae Tōju (1608-1648),

the founder of the Japanese Yangming school who developed a cosmology and religious

practiced centered on the Xiaojing. 105 Tōju not only worshiped and recited the Xiaojing

every morning himself, but also implemented this practice at his Academy. 106 Tōju’s

practice was probably based on Yang Qiyuan’s Xiaojing weiyi (Ritual of recitation of the

105
Yamashita Ryuji, “Chūgoku seiso to Tōju” (Chinese thought and Tōju), in Yamanoi Yu, eds. Nakae Tōju
(Tokyo: Iwanami, 1971), pp. 356-407.

43
Xiaojing), which describes the morning ritual and meditation on the Xiaojing. 107 In

addition to Yang Qiyuan, several other late Ming and early Qing scholars, such as Lu

Weiqi (1587-1641), Pan Pingge (1610-1677), and Xu Sanli (1625-1691), all followed

certain ritual practices related to the Xiaojing text. 108 In other words, resonant with the

discourse of filial piety and the Xiaojing discussed in this article, the Xiaojing was not

only treated as a religious canon, it was also treated as a ritual text in particular ritual

settings created by individual literati in their daily lives. To fully discuss the interactions

between Chinese and Japanese intellectual developments or the ritual practice related to

the Xiaojing in the Ming Qing lies beyond the scope of this article. These related topics,

however, invite further research, and suggest something of the importance of filial piety

for the intellectual and religious history of late imperial China.

Glossary

ai shen 愛身

ai 愛

biqiu 比丘

106
Nakae Tōju, “Gagusha zayukai,” in Tōju sensei zenshū (Shiga: Tōju shoyin, 1928), juan 3, p. 21.
107
The text of Xiaojing weiyi was included in Jiang Yuanzuo’s Xiaojing daquan, in which its author is not
mentioned. In Yang Qiyuan’s works, we found a text named Song Xiaojing guan (Recitation and mediation
on the Xiaojing), which is identical to the Xiaojing weiyi except for a minor variation in two characters.
Yang’s compilation of Shuoxiao sanshu also includes this text. Ying Shi, a Qing scholar, also attributed the
authorship to Yang Qiyuan. See Yang Qiyuan, Taishi Yang Fuso xiansheng zhengxue bian, juan 4, pp.
4b-5b; Yang Qiyuan ed. Shuoxiao sanshu, p. 2b; Ying Shi, Du Xiaojing (Reading the Xiaojing), (Tainan:
Zhuang yan publisher, 1997), juan 1, p. 3b.
108
Lu Weiqi, “ Wuse shiba jingye xiaozhi ji” (Record on the five-colored and eighteen-leaves ganoderma
of filial piety), in Mingde xiansheng wenji (The collected works of Lu Weiqi), (Tainan: Zhuang yan
publisher, 1997), juan 10, pp. 1a-2b; Pan Pingge, Panzi qiujenlu jiyao (Collected essentials of Mr. Pan’s
inquiry into humanity), (Tainan: Zhuang yan publisher, 1995); Xu Sanli, “Gaotianlou gaofa,” (The ritual
manual in the Telling-Heaven Building), in Tianzhong Xuzi zhengxue heyi ji (Collected works of Master
Xu on the unity of politics and learning), (Tainan: Zhuang yan publisher, 1995). Wang Fan-sen, Wan Ming
Qing chu sixiang shilun (Ten inquiries into the thought of the Ming-Qing transission), (Shanghai: Fudan
University Press, 2004), pp. 51-88; 291-329.

44
chenwei 讖緯

Chunqiu 春秋

da fa 大法

da fumu 大父母

Da ya 大雅

da yi 大義

dan 淡

Daotong 道統

ding 定

Ershisi xiao 二十四孝

fangsheng hui 放生會

Feng Mengzhen 馮夢禎

Fu Xi 伏羲

gangtong shenming 感通神明

ganying 感應

Gu Xiancheng 顧憲成

haoran zhi qi 浩然之氣

Hou Ji 后稷

Huang Ruheng 黃汝亨

Hundun 混沌

Huzhou 湖州

Ji Ben 季本

jianghui 講會

45
Jiang Yuanzuo 江元祚

jing 敬

Jitong 祭統

Kaofeng Yuanmiao 高峰原妙

Kuaizuetang manlu 快雪堂漫錄

lao 老

Li Rihua 李日華

Liang huang chan 梁皇懺

liangzhi 良知

liao Dao 了道

Liji 禮記

Liu Yu 劉玉

lixue 理學

Lu Weiqi 呂維祺

Luo Rufang 羅汝芳

Meng Qiu 孟秋

Ming wang 明王

ming 命

mingde 明德

Nanping 南屏

Nie Hong 聶鋐

ning 寧

Pan Pingge 潘平格

46
Qi Song 契嵩

Sanjing xu 三經序

Shen Hui 沈淮

shen 神

shengjie 身戒

Shenglian she 勝蓮社

shenming 神明

shifu peitian 事父配天

Shijie bian xu 誓戒編序

Shuoxiao sanshu 說孝三書

Sun Ben 孫本

Suqian 宿遷

Taixu 太虛

Tang Xianzu 湯顯祖

tian 天

Tianming dicha 天明地察

Tianmu 天目

tijen 體仁

Tu Long 屠隆

wai shen 外身

Wan wu yi ti zhi ren 萬物一體之仁

Wang Yangming 王陽明

weishi 唯識

47
Xi ming 西銘

xiao di ci 孝弟慈

Xiaojing daquan 孝經大全

Xiaojing jiling 孝經集靈

Xiaojing wei 孝經緯

Xiaojing weiyi 孝經威儀

Xiaojing yinzheng 孝經引證

Xiaojing zhengyi 孝經正義

Xiaojing zonglei 孝經總類

Xiaojing zongzhi 孝經宗旨

Xiaolun 孝論

xiaosi 孝思

xing 性

xinzhai 心齋

Xue 學

Xu Sanli 許三禮

Yan Jun 顏鈞

yang 陽

Yang Dongming 楊東明

Yang Jian 楊簡

Yang Qiyuan 楊起元

yi ti 遺體

ying 陰

48
Yu Chunxi 虞淳熙

yu qi she ling 馭氣攝靈

yuan qi 元氣

Yuanjue jing 圓覺經

Yulanpen jing 盂蘭盆經

Yuzhang 豫章

Zeng Zi 曾子

Zhaijie shiqin zhi mu 齋戒事親之目

zhaijie 齋戒

Zhang Zai 張載

Zhejiang 浙江

zhengchuan 正傳

zhiyu 制欲

Zhongxiao jing ming dao 忠孝淨明道

Zhu Hong 朱鴻

Zhuhong 袾宏

Zhujing pingjie 諸經品節

Zhu Xi 朱熹

Zi Si 子思

zi 字

zi 子

Zong Mi 宗密

Zongchuan tu 宗傳圖

49
zongmiao 宗廟

Zuetong zhi tu 學統之圖

References

Araki Kengo, Zhou Xianbo trans., Jinshi Zhongguo fojiao de shukuang: Yunqi Zhu Hong zhi yanjiu (The
twilight of Chinese Buddhism in the pre-Modern ear: studies on Yunqi Zhuhong), (Taipei: Huiming
wenhua, 2001).
Brokaw, Cynthia. The Ledgers of Merit and Demerit: Social Change and Moral Order in Late Imperial
China (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1991).
Capps, Walter. Religious Studies: The Making of a Discipline (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1995).
Ch’en, Kenneth K. S. “Filial piety in Chinese Buddhism,” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 28 (1968),
pp. 81-97.
Cheng Yu-Ying. Wanming bai yiwang de sixiangjia:Luo Rufang shiwen shiji biennian (A chronological
biography of Lou Rufang: poet, philosopher, activist), (Taipei: Kuangwen shuju, 1995).
Chiang Yuanzuo. Xiaojing daquan (A complete annotated edition of Xiaojing), (Jinan: Shandong youyi
shushe, 1991).
Ching, Julia. Mysticism and Kingship in China (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997).
Cole, Alan. Mothers and Sons in Chinese Buddhism (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1998).
De Bary, William T., ed., Sources of Chinese Tradition (New York: Columbia University Press, 1964).
Feng Mengzhen. Kuaixuetang manlu (Random notes from the Quick-Snow Hall), (Chengdu: Bashu shushe,
2000).
Gregory Schopen. “Filial piety and the monks in the practices of Indian Buddhism: a question of
‘Sincization’ view from the other side,” Toung Pao 70 (1984), pp. 110-126.
Gu Zheng-mei. “Dasheng fojiao xiaokuan de fazhen beijing,” (The developmental background of the ideas
about filial piety in the Great Vehicle of Buddhism) in Fu Weixun, ed., Cong chuantong dao xiandai:
fojiao lunli yu xiandai shehui (From tradition to the modern: Buddhism and the modern society),
(Taipei: Dongda tushu, 1990), pp. 61-105.
Huang Chin-shing. You ru sheng yu (Entering the Master’s Sanctuary), (Taipei: Yunchen wenhua, 1994).
Huang Xiaoshi. Jingming dao yenjiu (Studies on Jingming Daoist sect), (Chengdu: Bashu shushe, 1999).
Huang Yuanji, ed., Jingming zhongxiao quanshu (Completed works of the Jingming Zhongxiao Sect),
(Taipei: Xinwenfeng, 1985).
Kaji Nobuyuki. Chūgoku sisō kara mita nihon sisōsi kenkyu (Studies of Japanese intellectual history from
the perspective of Chinese thought), (Tokyo: Yoshikwa kōbunkan, 1985).
Kong Yinda. Liji Zhengyi (Annotations of the Book of Rites), (Taipei: Yiwen yinshuguan, 1960).
Ku Xiancheng. Xiaoxin zhai daji (Notes from the Study of Watchfulness), (Taipei: Kuangwen shuju,
1975).
Laozi, Daodejing, trans. by James Legge. in The Texts of Taoism (New York: Julian, 1959).
Leng Dexi. Zhaoyue shenghua (Beyond myth), (Beijing: Dongfang chubanshe, 1996).
Li Yenshou. Nan shi (History of the Southern Dynasties), (Taipei: Dinwen shuju, 1958).
Lu Weiqi. Mingde xiansheng wenji (The collected works of Lu Weiqi), (Tainan: Zhuang yan publisher,
1997).
Lu Miaw-fen. Yangming xue shiren shequn (The Wang Yangming school during the Ming Dynasty),
(Taipei: Institute of Modern History, Academia Sinica, 2003).
＿＿＿. “Wan-Ming shiren lun Xiaojing yu zheng zhi jiao hua,”(The Classic of filial piety and its political
implications in the late Ming) Taida wenshizhe xuebao, 61 (2005), pp. 223-260.
Luo Rufang. Xujiang Luo Jinxi xiansheng quanji (A complete works of Luo Rufang of Xujiang).
Michihata Ryōshū. Chōgoku bukkyō to jukyō rinri kō to no kōshō (Tokyo: Shoen, 1985).

50
Nakae Tōju. Tōju sensei zenshū (Shiga: Tōju shoyin, 1928).
Pan Pingge. Panzi qiujenlu jiyao (Collected essentials of Mr. Pan’s inquiry into humanity), (Tainan:
Zhuang yan publisher, 1995).
Peng Jiqing. Jushi zhuan (Biogaphies of lay Buddhist practitioners), (Chengdu: Chengdu guji shudian,
2000), pp. 215-216.
Qi Song, Xiaolun, in Fujiao bian (Collection on the supplement to teaching), (Taipei: Xinwenfeng, 1991).
Qing Xitai, ed. Zhongguo daojiao shi (A history of Chinese Daoism), (Chengdu: Sichuan renming
chubanshe, 1993).
Ran Yunhua. “Zhongguo fojiao dui xiaodao de shourong ji houkuo,” (The reception and development of
filial piety in Chinese Buddhism) in Cong yindu fojiao dao zhongguo fojiao (From Indian Buddhism
to Chinese Buddhism), (Taipei: Dundao tushu, 1995), pp. 43-55.
Sakai Tadao. Chūgoku zensho no kenkyū (Studies on Chinese morality books)(Tokyo: kobundo, 1960).
Smith, Jonathan Z.. “Religion, Religions, Religious,” in Mark C Taylor, ed. Critical Terms for Religious
Studies (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1998), p. 281-282.
Taylor, Mark C.. Critical Terms for Religious Studies (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1998).
Taylor, Rodney. The Religious Dimensions of Confucianism (New York: State University of New York
Press, 1990).
＿＿＿. “The Study of Confucianism as a Religious Traditions: Notes on Some Recent Publications,”
Jounal of Chinese Religions, 18 (1990), pp. 143-159.
Taylor, Rodney & Arbuckle, Gary. “Confucianism,” The Journal of Asian Studies, 54.2 (1995), pp.
347-354.
Teiser, Stephen. The Ghost Festival in Medieval China (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1988).
Thompson, Kirill. “The Religious in Neo-Confucianism,” Asian Culture Quarterly, 18.4 (1990), pp. 44-57.
Tu Long. Hong Bao (Grand enclosure), (Tainan: Zhuangyen publisher, 1995).
Tu Wei-ming. Centrality and Commonality (New York: State University of New York Press, 1989).
Wang Fan-sen. “Mingmo Qingchu de renpu yu xingguo hui,” (The manual for men and the associations for
self-examination in the late Ming and early Qing periods), Lishi yuyen yenjiuso jikan 63 (1993), pp.
679-712.
＿＿＿. Wan Ming Qing chu sixiang shilun (Ten inquires into the thoughts during the Ming-Qing
transission), (Shanghai: Fudan University Press, 2004).
Wang Yueqing. Zhongguo fojiao lunli sixiang (The ethical thought in Chinese Buddhism), (Taipei: Yunlung
chubanshe, 2001).
Wilson, Thomas A. ed. On Sacred Grounds (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Asia Center, Harvard
University Press, 2002).
Wu Daonan, Wu Wenke gong wenji (Collected works of Wu Daonan), (Beijng: Beijing chubanshi, 2000).
Wu Pei-yi. “Self-examination and confession of sins in traditional China,” Harvard Journal of Asiatic
Studies 39: 1 (1979), pp. 5-38.
Xiao Zixian. Nan Qi shu (History of the Southern Qi Dynasty), (Taipei: Dinwen shuju, 1990).
Xu Sanli. Tianzhong Xuzi zhengxue heyi ji (Collected works of Master Xu on the unity of politics and
learning), (Tainan: Zhuang yan publisher, 1995).
Xu Xingwu. Chenwei wenxian yu handai wenhua goujian (Texts of prognostication and apocrypha and the
construction of the Han-Dynasty culture), (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 2003).
Yamashita Ryuji, “Chūgoku seiso to Tōju,”(Chinese thought and Tōju) in Yamanoi Yu, eds. Nakae Tōju
(Tokyo: Iwanami Co., 1971), pp. 356-407.
Yang Qiyuan, ed., Xiaojing zongzhi, in Shouxiao sanshu (Three texts on filial piety), (Shanghai: Wenmin
shuju, 1922).
＿＿＿. Taishi Yang Fuso xiansheng zhengxue bian(Compilation of verified learning, by Yang Qiyuan).
＿＿＿. Xiaojing Kuangyi (Broaden meanings of the Xiaojing), (published in 1700, stored in Shanghai
Library).
＿＿＿. Xiaojing yinzhen (Drawing evidence for the Xiaojing), (Taipei: Yiwen shuju, 1965).
＿＿＿. Xiaojing yinzheng (Shanghai: Mingwen shuju, 1922).
＿＿＿. Yang taishi jiacang wenji (Family stored collected writings of Yang Qiyuan), (A late Ming version,
stored in the Fusinian Library, Academia Sinica).
＿＿＿. Zhujing pinjie (Tainan: Zhuangyen wenhua shiye, 1995).

51
Ying Shi. Du Xiaojing (Read the Xiaojing), (Tainan: Zhuang yan publisher, 1997).
Yao Silian. Chen shu (History of the Chen Dynasty), (Taipei: Dinwen shuju, 1985).
Yao Silian. Liang shu (History of the Liang Dynasty), (Taipei: Dinwen shuju, 1990).
Ye Luhua, Zhongguo fojiao lunli sixiang(The ethical thought in Chinese Buddhism), (Shanghai: Shanghai
shihui kexueyuan chubanshe, 2000).
Yoshikawa Tadao. ” Richuchō jidai ni okeiru kōkyō no juyō “ (Reception of the Xiaojing during the Six
Dynasties), in Rikuchō seishinshi kenkyū (Intellectual history of the Six Dynasties), (Kyoto:
Dōhōsha , 1984), pp. 547-567.
Yu Chung-fang. The Renewal of Buddhism in China: Chu-Hung and the Late Ming Synthesis (New York:
Columbia University Press, 1981).
Yu Chunxi. Yu Deyuan xiansheng ji (Collected works of Yu Chunxi), (Peking: Peking chubanshe, 2000).
Zhong Zhaopeng. Chenwei lunlue (Brief discussion on prognostication and apocrypha), (Shenyang:
Liaoning chuban she, 1992).
Zhou Kaode. Daojiao wenhua yu shenghuo (The culture and lives of Daoism), (Beijing: Zongjiao wenhua
chubanshe, 1999).
Zhou Xipo. “Daojiao wenxian zhong xiaodao wenxue yenjiu,” (Study on the Daoist literature about filial
piety), (Master thesis, Wenhua University, 1995).
Zhu Hong, ed. Xiaojing zonglei (A compilation of the Xiaojing-related texts), (Shanghai: Shanghai guji
chubanshe, 1995).
Zong Mi. Foshuo yulanpen jing shu (Commentary on the ghost festival sutra), (Taipei: Xinwenfeng, 1987)
Zou Yi. Qi Zhen yeh sheng (Unofficial history of the periods of Tianqi and Chongzhen), (Beijing: Beijing
chuban she, 2000).

52