0 valutazioniIl 0% ha trovato utile questo documento (0 voti)
54 visualizzazioni15 pagine
This article aims to clarify Hegel's misunderstanding of Ancient Chinese religion. Hegel oversimplified these notions when he characterized Ancient Chinese religion as a kind of natural religion. In some respects he misunderstood the religion of ancient China due to his lack of first-hand data and his personal prejudices.
This article aims to clarify Hegel's misunderstanding of Ancient Chinese religion. Hegel oversimplified these notions when he characterized Ancient Chinese religion as a kind of natural religion. In some respects he misunderstood the religion of ancient China due to his lack of first-hand data and his personal prejudices.
This article aims to clarify Hegel's misunderstanding of Ancient Chinese religion. Hegel oversimplified these notions when he characterized Ancient Chinese religion as a kind of natural religion. In some respects he misunderstood the religion of ancient China due to his lack of first-hand data and his personal prejudices.
Di and Tian in Ancient Chinese Thought: A Critical
Analysis of Hegels Views CHEN Derong Published online: 11 January 2009 # Springer Science + Business Media B.V. 2009 Abstract The notions of Di (Emperor), Shangdi (God in heaven), and Tian (Heaven) were endowed with a variety of meanings and were used to refer to different objects of worship in ancient Chinese religion. In different eras, Di referred to the earthly emperor as well as to the heavenly emperor; Tian referred to the physical sky as well as to a supreme personal god in different contexts. Hegel oversimplified these three notions when he characterized ancient Chinese religion as a kind of natural religion. This article aims to clarify Hegels misunderstanding of ancient Chinese religion by clarifying the meanings and references of these three notions as they appeared in the Yin-Shang and the Zhou Dynasties. Keywords Hegel . Natural religion . Ancient Chinese thought Georg W. F. Hegel (17701831), whose philosophy remains influential in China today, introduced the religion of ancient China to the West. His study of ancient Chinese religious creeds and cults greatly enriched Westerners knowledge of the religion and culture of ancient China. However, due to his lack of first-hand data and his personal prejudices, in some respects Hegel misunderstood the religion of ancient China. Considering Hegels significant influence on the history of communication between Western and Chinese cultures, it is necessary to clarify Hegels understanding of ancient Chinese religion. This article attempts to shed light on how Hegel, in his lectures on the philosophy of religion, misunderstood three specific concepts of ancient Chinese Dao (2009) 8:1327 DOI 10.1007/s11712-008-9096-3 CHEN Derong (*) College of Philosophy, Wuhan University, Wuhan, Hubei 430072, Peoples Republic of China e-mail: drchen@whu.edu.cn religion: Di (Emperor), Shangdi (Emperor in heaven), 1 and Tian (Heaven). 2 I will first discuss Hegels characterization of the religion of ancient China as a natural religion and assess the appropriateness of this account. Second, I shall examine Hegels comprehension of the concepts Di and Shangdi as found in ancient Chinese religion, seeing whether or not his understanding is reasonable. Third, I shall analyze Hegels interpretation of the concept Tian (Heaven). This analysis will lead to a clarification of whether the ancient Chinese worshiped physical objects or spiritual objects. Based on this examination of Hegels interpretations of Di (Emperor), Shang Di (Emperor in heaven), and Tian (heaven), I shall elucidate in what sense Hegels view of ancient Chinese religion is appropriate and inappropriate. Finally, I will argue that Hegel misinterprets ancient Chinese religion as being a completely natural religion. 1 Hegels Characterization of the Religion of Ancient China In Hegels philosophy of religion, religion is understood as a spirit that recognizes itself in consciousness. Different religions in the world manifest the evolution of the absolute spirit. The spirits development undergoes three stages and, accordingly, the religions in the world have three forms: first, natural religion (Hegel 19841987: 2. 234); 3 second, the religion of spiritual individuality or subjectivity, which has two forms, the Jewish and Greek religions; and third, absolute religion, of which the Roman religion is an example (Hegel 19841987: 2. 236237). Hegel believes that these three forms of religion are similar to the stages of the life of a person who grows from childhood to youth and then to maturity or old age. Each form has its own characteristics, just as a person at different stages of his or her life has different characteristics. Hegel thinks that the child is still in a state of immediate unity of will and nature, and accordingly natural religion is the religion of a human beings childhood. In childhood, a human being unifies his or her subjective will with objective things in the natural world, wherein he or she finds the objects of worship. As the child grows up, he/she becomes a youth and enters a stage during which he or she is interested in everything, questions 1 There are different translations of the Chinese term Shangdi , for instance, The Lord on High, The Supreme Ruler in Heaven (Thompson 1989: 164), the High God (De Bary 1999: 27). I suggest using Heavenly Emperor or Emperor in Heaven to translate the Chinese characters Shangdi , because the translations Lord on High or High God, though close to their literal meanings, do not convey the divinity of Shangdi or the divine features implied in these two characters. 2 Heaven as an English translation of the Chinese character Tian is widely accepted, but several scholars also recognize the difficulties in translating this Chinese word. For instance, Franklin Perkins claims that it has misleading connotations to translate the Chinese character Tian as heaven, particularly in a comparative study of the problem of evil (Perkins 2006: 295 note 5). Kurtis Hagen indicates that it is difficult to translate Tian because there is no single English word that can cover the range of its meanings. Thus, Kurtis Hagen suggests that we make some generations of its meanings. According to him, The founders of the Zhou dynasty, in an effort to justify their usurpation of power, attempted to link tian with Shangdi , the Lord on High. They characterized the ruler as tianzi , the son of tian, and argued that their rule was sanctioned by tianming , the mandate of tian (Hagen 2006: 314). Nevertheless, in this article, I accept the English word Heaven as a translation of the Chinese character Tian. 3 English versions of Hegels writings give different renderings for this: immediate religion, natural religion, and nature religion (Hegel 19841987: 2. 234). In this article, I shall use natural religion. Contemporary scholars offer different explanations of the term natural religion. For instance, Catherine L. Albanese says, Natural religion therefore meant the religion of reason alone; or, in tandem with human reason, the religion that looked to nature as its holy book of inspiration (Albanese 2002: 1). 14 CHEN Derong everything, but still has no particular overall purpose. In this period, the objects that the human being worships are multiple. The third stage, absolute religion, corresponds to adulthood or old age, when, as Hegel writes, an adult works for his or her particular purpose, and then in old age, comes back from the particular purpose to the universal, and works for the universal purpose (Hegel 19841987: 2. 237238). It seems to Hegel that absolute religion corresponds to the highest stage of adulthood. A human being then no longer engages in worshiping multiple deities but focuses on a universal spiritual entity. God is the only object that humans worship at this stage. According to Hegel, a true adult religion involves the consciousness of God. Hegel states, Religion [is] defined generally as the consciousness of God, of God the absolute Object; but Gods consciousness and subjectivitythe genuine objectis the whole. That God whom we designed as a mere object over against consciousness is an abstraction (Hegel 19841987: 3. 62). What is God then? According to Hegel, the following features belong to God: God is the absolute truth, the truth of all things (Hegel 19841987: 1. 366); God is the absolute substance, the only true actuality (Hegel 19841987: 1. 369); God is the universal, absolute and essential Spirit (Hegel 1985: 130); and God is Unity of concept and reality (Hegel 19841987: 3. 6566). Based on these features of God, we may assume that Hegels God is absolute idea or absolute spirit in which spirit and reality are united. Essentially, this implies a spiritual existence, because it is the truth of all things, but not all things themselves. Even though the truth of all things is united in the absolute idea or absolute spirit, this absolute idea or absolute spirit is actual as well as spiritual. It is an actual as well as ultimately spiritual entity. Now natural religion worships natural objects, not a God as ultimate spiritual entity: Nature religion is one in which human beings revere natural objects as God (Hegel 19841987: 2. 531). The objects of worship are natural beings but not spiritual entities, which is the essential difference between natural religion and advanced religion. Hegel locates all Oriental religions at this first stage, the stage of natural religion. In a natural religion the spirit objectifies itself and unites itself with particular natural things, such as the sun, the moon, rivers, mountains, and so forth. It seems to Hegel that all Oriental religions fall within this category. Hegel speaks of Nature religion in general, to which the Oriental religions all belong wholly as they do in this unity of nature and spirit and the mingling of them both (Hegel 19841987: 2. 236). At this stage, because spirit is still identical with natural things, consciousness remains one with natural things. Therefore, it seems to Hegel that there is no spiritual freedom in natural religion. Spirit is essentially free, but as long as it is united with natural things it loses its freedom. In his 1827 lecture, Hegel classified ancient Chinese religion as a natural religion even though he feels hesitant to do so. 4 In the 1831 lecture, Hegel mentioned the religion of Heaven ( Tian) and Dao, regarding them as developments of a magic religion, but claimed that they still belong to the first form of natural religion. 5 Hegel defines the religion of ancient China as one form of the magic religions, albeit the highest among them. Hegel states, We find this religion of magic also, most notably, in Africa and among the Mongols and Chinese, but there we no longer have the completely raw, primitive shape of magic. Mediations are already coming into play, arising from the fact that the spiritual 4 Chinese religion was regarded as the developed form (fourth stage or form) of Magic; but Hegel himself doubted if it was correct to classify Chinese religion as magic religion (Hegel 19841987: 2. 59). 5 According to Hegel, Buddhism and Lamaism belong to the second form of natural religion, and Hinduism is regarded as the third form of nature religion (Hegel 19841987: 2. 562). Di and Tian in Ancient Chinese Thought: A Critical Analysis of Hegels Views 15 is beginning to assume an objective shape for self-consciousness. (Hegel 19841987: 2. 275) Here Hegel seems to place a higher valuation on Chinese religion. Although ancient Chinese religion is a natural religion, it shows some developed features of the religion of magic, because some spiritual factors are involved. The so-called religion of magic, according to Hegels definition, involves spiritual power over nature; this religion is the oldest and crudest form of religion. The spirit or self-consciousness within certain particular natural things is believed to have a power to affect the natural world, including human life, and so people worship this power. In their minds, there are some natural things in which supernatural powers reside, and this power can affect or control peoples fates. Hegel thinks that when a singular self-consciousness knows itself as power over nature, and the self- consciousness is the exercise of this power, this religion is called magic. This religion does not begin in fear, but stems from freedom, and the faithful believe this religion just as they would believe in a magician. 6 Hegel acknowledges that the spiritual is beginning to assume an objective shape for self-consciousness, but he does not mean that this kind of religion is no longer a natural religion. He asserts that nature religion contains the spiritual moment directly, so that the spiritual is the highest reality of human beings (Hegel 1984 1987: 2. 531), but this natural religion is still different from absolute religion. In absolute religion, the highest reality is God, and God is spirit (Hegel 19841987: 3. 65). Hegel thinks that in the religion of ancient China, the human emperor (Di ) was regarded as the highest spirit, but not as God. In his 1828 lecture on the philosophy of religion, Hegel states, The content of the principle is that the existent singular self-consciousness is still the divine power. This time it is the emperor of China, the source of all laws in the present world, but also the lord of nature. He governs by means of genii, namely such of the dead as he appoints for the purpose. (Hegel 19841987: 2. 299) The period Hegel deals with is the Zhou Dynasty (1100?249 BCE) and the emperors Hegel specifically mentions are the first Zhou emperor King Wu and the last Zhou emperor ZHOU Xin . Yet regarding the role of the emperor Hegel also mentions, When a new dynasty comes to the throne, everything in heaven and on earth has to be renewed (Hegel 19841987: 2. 300). Here Hegels view of the religion of ancient China seems to be a reflection of the situation that obtained in the previous period from the Shang (or Yin ) Dynasty (1600?1100? BCE) up to the Zhou Dynasty, when use of terminologies and practices may well have changed. In any case Hegel here reports that Chinese people worshiped only a secular power or take secular power as the primary source of their spiritual movements. As this does not fulfill the requirements of an absolute religion that worships a pure spiritual power, Hegel thus ranks Chinese religion as one of the natural religions. 6 Hegel explains, when they need rain, and if there is a long period without rain, it is for the magician to summon it up (Hegel 19841987: 2. 276). Again, When the clouds came nearer all the same, he waved his arms and conjured the storm to go somewhere else (Hegel 19841987: 2. 277). Hegel says, All of this has, then, the character of determinate consciousness of power over nature (Hegel 19841987: 2. 277). Hegel points out, The main feature of this sphere of magic is direct mastery over nature through the will, the self- consciousness awareness that spirit is something higher than nature (Hegel 1987, 2: 277). The major feature of natural religion is conjuring, just like a magician who can conjure many things from nothing. 16 CHEN Derong However, the problem here is, did the concept Di in the Shang-Zhou Dynasties really refer to the human emperor as Hegel understood it? I will discuss this question in part three. In order to make clear how Hegel defined the concept Di, we need more evidence to further analyze Hegels view. In his 1831 lecture on the philosophy of religion, Hegel talked about Di and gods: 7 The emperor is lord over the visible world of the mandarins just as he is over the invisible shen (gods). The gods (shen) of rain, rivers, and the like are the general overseers who have the particular local genii under them, those who watch over the rain, rivers, etc., in smaller regions. (Hegel 19841987: 2. 555) Hegel further explained, The emperor gave his commands directly to these shen, and these shen had to take care to rule well; if they do not, then both they and the shen are removed from office (Hegel 19841987: 2. 555). He then concluded, This is the form of this natural religion: the emperor alone knows the mandates of heaven, he alone stands in communication with heaven, and his lordship extends over both the visible and the invisible (Hegel 19841987: 2. 555). The essential reason for Hegel to characterize the religion of ancient China as a natural religion is that the ancient Chinese revered the emperor (Di ) in the present world. Hegel mistakenly thought that the ancient Chinese believed the Di in the present world to be the ruler of the present world as well as of the invisible world, the ruler of human beings as well as shen (deities/gods). Although there is a spiritual factor in the religion of ancient China, according to Hegel, the spirit is the self-consciousness of human beings themselves and not the consciousness of God as being over human beings (as in the Christian sense). Thus, the religion of ancient China for Hegel is one form of natural religion. However, the fact that the original ancient Chinese religion was related to human activities and natural things cannot effectively demonstrate that ancient Chinese religion is actually a kind of natural religion. Strictly speaking, all religions more or less possess some characteristics of a natural religion. As Schleiermacher says, If a religion does not begin with some original fact, it cant begin at all (Schleiermacher 1962: 300). Kant also says, Every religion necessarily contains elements of this Natural Religion, for otherwise it could not exist as a religion at all (Kant 1889). In a certain respect, we may say that most religions share some common features with natural religion. As one of many religions in the world, the fact that ancient Chinese religion in its early stages had some components of natural religion cannot be regarded as sufficient evidence to characterize the whole belief system as only a natural religion. But I submit that the accuracy of this assessment in Hegels characterization of ancient Chinese religion is compromised by his misunderstanding of the concept Di in ancient Chinese beliefs. 2 Hegels Misunderstanding of Di In ancient China, people indeed worshiped different kinds of natural things around them, just as they also worshiped their ancestors. Archaeological studies demonstrate that in the Neolithic Age, the Chinese began to believe that all things have spirits, and so they began 7 In the English translation of Hegels lecture, the term gods was used to translate the Chinese word shen , but I suggest using deity to translate the Chinese word shen. I use the word shen as a plural noun to refer to deities and Shen as a single noun, to indicate God or the supreme deity, or the Emperor in heaven. Di and Tian in Ancient Chinese Thought: A Critical Analysis of Hegels Views 17 to worship mountains, rivers, the sun, the moon, stone, fire, trees, heaven, earth, and animals. Subsequently, with increasing productivity, the primitive worship of nature gradually developed into the worship of totems. Some tribes believed that they had a special relationship with fish, while others believed that they had a special relationship with birds, plants, or animals. Furthermore, ancestors became objects of worship, and this worship of human beings became the worship of soul or spirit. Ancestors as biological individuals died, but their descendants believed that the souls of their ancestors still existed somewhere, and so these souls as spiritual entities also became the objects of worship. According to oracle-bone inscriptions uncovered in ruins from the Ying Dynasty, the character Di appears in a passage, saying that when dead a certain king becomes the guest of emperor (Chen 1993). In this sentence, the late king refers to a deceased king from the past, and Di refers to the emperor in heaven. After the death of the previous king, he becomes a guest of the emperor in heaven. 8 Thus, ancestors and the deceased emperor do not live in the present world, but live in heaven. Both the late king or dead ancestors and the emperor were objects of worship for the Yin people. In the Book of Poetry (Shijing ), which is regarded as the earliest reliable written record in Chinese culture, we find a similar reference to Di: King Wen is on high, Oh! Bright is he in heaven. Although Chou was an old country, the [favoring] appointment lighted on it recently. Illustrious was the House of Chou, and the appointment of God came at the proper season. King Wen ascends and descends, on the left and the right of God. (Legge 1960: 427428) In this poem, King Wen (11541122 BCE) is positioned on high on the left and right of the emperor, which means that both King Wen and the emperor are in heaven, but the place of the emperor is higher than the place of King Wen. Records both on oracle bones and in the Shijing indicate that the dead king and the emperor play different roles in heaven. The worship of the late king and the worship of the emperor in heaven are different, although both of them are forms of worship. In Hegels terminology of the philosophy of religion, the self-consciousness of the emperor in heaven and the self-consciousness of a human being are different in ancient China. Since the Yin Dynasty, the spirit in Chinese religion began to move beyond the limitation of the self-consciousness of a human being and was related to the self-consciousness of a spiritual substance similar to God. Di refers to the emperor of heaven. This emperor is different from any ruler in the present world. Although after his death the king has a special place in heaven, the kings themselves are not the rulers of heaven. However, the word Di sometimes does refer to the emperor in the present world. For instance, in the Book of Poetry, we also read, We rise at sunrise, we rest at sunset, dig wells and drink, till our fields and eatwhat is the strength of the emperor to us? 9 This poem describes the freedom of ancient Chinese farmers and the agricultural characteristics of peoples life in the country. They live relying entirely on nature and their own hands; they do not need to care for the emperors power. The term Di, emperor, in this poem can be understood as the emperor in the present world. Likewise, in 8 The word bin could mean obey or subject. In this sense, the sentence on an oracle bone could mean that the previous King obeys or subjects himself to the emperor. In any sense, it is certain that there is an emperor over the king and the emperor is not the same as the king. The role and place of a previous king or late king must be lower than the emperor in heaven. 9 , , , , . James Legge translates the last sentence as What is the strength of the emperor? (Legge 1960: 13) 18 CHEN Derong the Canon of Yao (Yao Dian ) 10 there is a record about the earliest emperor Yao (23562254 BCE): Anciently there was the emperor [di] Yaou [Yao], all-informed, intelligent, accomplished, and thoughtful. The term Di in this poem refers to a particular person, a man in the present world, Yao (Legge 1960: 208). The term Di is frequently used in the entire Shang Shu , but the difference between Di and Shanggdi becomes clearer. In particular, toward the end of the Yin Dynasty, the title Di was used to indicate the king of the present world. The two kings who reigned at the end of the Yin Dynasty were thus called Di Yi and Di Xin (Emperor Yi and Xin). 11 Toward the end of the Shang Dynasty, the ancient Chinese created the concept of Shangdi (Emperor in heaven). According to GUO Moruo , Shangdi let it rain in February, Shangdi gave one country the authority to attack another country, and Shangdi was asked to bless the fighters (Guo 1982: 320). In the Book of Poetry, one of the poems describes the change of sovereigns from the Shang Dynasty to the Zhou Dynasty, saying There were the descendants of [the sovereigns] of Shang;The descendants of the sovereigns of Shang, were in number more than hundreds of thousands; But when God gave the command, They became subject to Chou (Legge 1960: 754). In this poem, Shangdi is described as the highest ruler who manages affairs in the present world. In another poem, Shangdi is treated as a reliable ruler of the natural world; the text says that there is a Shangdi on whom we may rely, therefore natural disasters will be harmless. 12 Shangdi is believed to be the highest ruler of both heaven and the present world. According to Chinese scholar DING Shan , the Shen (God) in heaven is called Shangdi (Emperor in heaven) after the Yin Dynasty. He states, Having investigated all the characters on the Oracle Bone of the time of Wu Ding [in the Yin Dynasty], it is apparent that the deity in heaven was called Di (Emperor) and not yet Shangdi (Ding 1988: 185 186). According to Ding, many important gods or deities (shen) were later also given the title Di , and then the emperor was called Di. Due to the ambiguity and inconsistency in the usage of the term Di, it is often difficult to distinguish between the two meanings of the same concept. In general, the emperor in the present world was called Di, and the emperor in heaven was also called Di; later Shangdi was used, but Shangdi was sometimes simplified as Di. The actual reference of the term Di was determined by the period when the term was used and by the context in which the term was specified; we cannot simply generalize about it. The question of how to understand the reference of the concept Di becomes a key to characterizing the religion of ancient China. It is therefore not surprising that Hegel was confused by the multiple features of the Di (emperor) and the Di (emperor in heaven). According to Hegels understanding of the concept Di (emperor), on the one hand, the emperor receives a mandate from Tian (Heaven), and on the other hand, the emperor has supreme power to manage both this world and the invisible world. As he says, the emperor alone knows the mandates of heaven, he alone stands in communication with heaven, and his lordship extends over both the visible and the invisible (Hegel 19841987: 10 The Canon of Yao, as one chapter of the Book of Documents (Shangshu ), recorded the events and pronouncements of the sage King Yao who reigned around the twenty-second century BCE (de Bary 1999: 29). Parts of the Book of Documents are believed to have been written in the Western Zhou Dynasty (1045- 771 BCE) (see Wilkinson 1998:473). 11 Historian GUO Morou points out, The title Di was duplicated for the king of people at the end of the Yin Dynasty (Guo 1982: 320-321). 12 , . James Legge translates as God regarded her with favor; And without injury or hurt (Legge 1960: 620). Di and Tian in Ancient Chinese Thought: A Critical Analysis of Hegels Views 19 2. 555). What does Hegels concept of emperor refer to? Since the emperor Hegel refers to receives a mandate from heaven and communicates with heaven, the emperor must be the emperor in the present world. However, in ancient China the emperor in the present world was not believed to rule the invisible world; if the emperor that Hegel mentions refers to the emperor in heaven, the emperor would not receive a mandate from and communicate with heaven. In fact, we will see that heaven is another name for Shangdi (Emperor in heaven). Hegel failed to distinguish between the two kinds of emperors referred to by the same name Di. Thus, he misunderstood the relationship between the emperor in the present world and the emperor in heaven. Not only did Hegel fail to recognize that the word Di could refer to the emperor in heaven as well as the ruler in the present world, he even shifted the power that belongs to the emperor in heaven to that of the emperor in the present world. He added the divinity that belongs to the emperor in heaven to the emperor in the present world. Hegel failed to distinguish between these two objects of worship in ancient China. Thus he failed to recognize the spiritual factor that goes beyond the self-consciousness of a human being. He misunderstood the roles of the emperor in the present world and of the emperor in heaven. He states, The existent singular self-consciousness is still the divine power. This time it is the emperor of China, the source of all laws in the present world, but also the lord of nature. He governs by means of genii, namely such of the dead as he appoints for the purpose. (Hegel 19841987: 2. 299) Here, Hegel interprets the emperor of China as the lord of the natural world as well as of the invisible world, which includes deities who are considered to be in charge of the mountains, the five elements, and the ghosts or the genii. Hegel further explains that the emperor on earth assigns different shen (gods) such as the deity who controls the four mountains in terms of his needs. Hegel thinks that if something is wrong, the emperor will assign a new shen and promote this shen to control the same place, i.e. a mountain or river. Hegel says, Thus in China the emperors lordship over nature is fully organized (Hegel 19841987: 2. 303). Hegel again confused the roles of the emperor in the present world and the emperor in heaven. 13 The relationship between the emperor and shen is the relationship between worshiper and worshipped objects. The emperor has the power to control this world (actual society) on behalf of the emperor in heaven, because he is believed to be the son of heaven, but he has no power to control the divine world. He may ask shen to help him in his ruling by praying to shen, because the power to command different shen belongs to the emperor in heaven who masters the destiny of the emperor on earth. In the royal court, the emperor used to assign different officials to handle the affairs of national sacrifices, but he did not directly assign any shen to handle anything. It is the power of Shangdi (Emperor in heaven) to assign different shen to control different parts of nature or spirits, and local genii, but not the emperor in the present world. The following point of view has been accepted by most contemporary scholars: The ancestors and Nature Powers could, like Di, also affect harvest, weather, campaigns, and the Kings health. It is clear, however, that Di stood at the peak of the 13 Peter C. Hodgson notes that when Hegel references the memoirs written by seventeenth and eighteenth- century Jesuit missionaries, he misses the significance of the word emperor (Hegel 19841987: 2. 299, footnote 172), but Hodgson intends to regard it as a technical error, while I would believe that Hegel theoretically misunderstands the different components of the same term Di, and other misunderstandings follow upon this. 20 CHEN Derong ultra-human, ultra-natural hierarchy, giving orders, which no ancestor could do, to the various natural hierarchies, giving orders, which no ancestor could do, to the various natural phenomena and responding to the intercessions of the Shang ancestors who were acting on behalf of their living descendants below. That Di was virtually the only power who could directly order (ling) rain or thunder, as well as the only power over the winds under his control, which sets him apart from all the other Powers, natural, predynastic, or ancestor, or ancestral. (de Bary 1999: 11) Di here refers to the emperor in heaven, while King refers to the ruler in the present world; only the emperor in heaven (Di) has the supreme power to rule the natural world. Hegel believed that the emperor of China promotes the dead to be the lords of nature (Hegel 19841987: 2. 299). Indeed, in the Yin-Shang Dynasty, dead ancestors were believed to be able to affect the fate, wealth, and future of the living, but they did not handle wind, rain, thunder, and flood. All these affairs are controlled under Di (the emperor in heaven). Hegel failed to clarify the relationship between the emperor on earth and the emperor in heaven, and the relationship between the emperor in heaven and dead ancestors. It is not enough, not even fair, to attribute the misunderstanding to Hegels personal prejudice. I would stress here that it is a misunderstanding of the multiple meanings of the same term Di, and the two concepts Di and Shangdi, that caused Hegel to mischaracterize the religion of ancient China. In his lecture on the philosophy of religion, Hegel also mixed the different meanings of the same term Di, thereby confusing the emperor who has power to rule the heavenly world with the ruler of the earthly world. Since he failed to distinguish between the emperor on earth and the emperor in heaven under the same name Di, and he failed to recognize the differences between Di and Shangdi, when he then deals with the religion of ancient China, the faith with which ancient Chinese worshiped a supremely powerful emperor (emperor in heaven) is accordingly interpreted by Hegel as a belief in a human being. 3 Hegels Misunderstanding of Tian We have seen that it was Hegels misconception of the ancient Chinese emperor and the emperors role in the religious faiths of ancient China that led him to characterize ancient Chinese religion as a natural religion. I further suggest that Hegels misunderstanding of Tian (heaven) is another reason why he could not recognize the spiritual features of ancient Chinese religion. Hegel noted that the emperor receives a mandate from heaven, communicates with Tian (Heaven), and rules the present world on behalf of heaven, but he did not recognize that heaven is also a personal God in the religion of ancient China. In Hegels view, instead, the emperor of China has ultimate power that only God could have. Hegel explains, It is not Tian that rules nature, for the emperor rules everything and only he is connected with this Tian. Only he brings offerings to Tian at the four main festivals of the year; it is only the emperor who converses with Tian, who directs his prayers to Tian. He alone stands in connection with Tian, and thus it is the emperor who rules the whole earth. Among us the prince rules, but God does, too; the prince is bound by the divine commandments. But here [it] is the emperor who has dominion even over nature and rules the powers themselves, and that is why all things on earth are the way they are. (Hegel 19841987: 2. 549550) Hegel appropriately describes the relationship between the emperor and his people, the relationship between the emperor and Tian, and the role and place of the emperor on earth, Di and Tian in Ancient Chinese Thought: A Critical Analysis of Hegels Views 21 but he misinterprets that the emperor has dominion even over nature and ignores the special characteristics of Tian. The power of the emperor, according to Hegel, exceeds the power that any emperor on earth could have. In Rejoinder of Shun (22542204 BCE), the successor of Yao, we may read more about Tians rule over nature: The sun and moon move in their orbits; the stars keep to their paths; the four seasons observe their turns, and all the people are truly good. Oh! Such music as I speak of corresponds to the power of Heaven, leading to worth and excellence; and all listen to it (Legge 1960: 14). 14 In this poem, Tian is believed to be the real ruler of nature, and it controls snow, wind, flood, rain, as well as the changing of the four seasons. The emperor on earth can do nothing to bring about these changes except by praying to Tian. What is the role of Tian through which the mandates were given to the emperor? Hegel thought that heaven in the ancient Chinese faiths is empty. He contrasts the Tian in ancient China with the God of Christianity: We distinguish the world or worldly phenomena in such a way that God rules beyond this world too. That is where heaven is, which is perhaps populated by the souls of the dead. The heaven of the Chinese or Tian, by contrast, is something totally empty (Hegel 19841987: 2. 550). Tian, for Hegel, is empty; therefore the emperor, a human being in this natural world, takes the place of God. In this sense, ancient Chinese religion remains at the level of worship of non-spirit objects. This understanding of the relationship between emperor and heaven is the basis upon which Hegel located ancient Chinese religion at the stage of a natural religion. The reason Hegel saw Tian as empty is that he understood Chinese Tian as a space where there should be something. Hegel argues, Hence the heaven of the Chinese is not a world that forms an independent realm above the earth. On the contrary, everything is upon earth, and everything that has power is subject to the emperor (Hegel 19841987: 2. 550, Note 105). Hegel thus overvalued the function of the emperor and thought that the emperor was the highest object of ancient Chinese worship. This fundamental misunderstanding prevented Hegel from recognizing the true nature of ancient Chinese religion. Generally speaking, during the Xia , Shang, and Zhou Dynasties, Di was used to refer to both the emperor in the present world and the emperor in heaven. The term Shangdi was specifically used to refer to the emperor in heaven, while the concept Tian almost replaced the word Shangdi, referring to the highest ruler in heaven. Heaven used to be regarded as the place where Shangdi lived, but it eventually became another name for Shangdi. According to DING Shan, in Pre-Qin literature, the respectful title of the Deity in heaven was either King, huang , or Emperor, Di (Ding 1988: 171), and the highest deity in the Books of Yu , Xia , Shang , and Zhou sometimes was called Tian and sometimes was called Di, and then again sometimes both Tian and Di (Ding 1988: 171). Further, the word Shangdi indeed appears in the Oracle Bone Inscription, but in the time of Wuding , Shangdi usually was simplified as Di (Ding 1988: 172). In the Zhou Dynasty, the so- called Deity in heaven sometimes was associated with the old named Shangdi (which was used in the Yin and Shang dynasties) and sometimes was also called Tian, both of which were consistently used in the Book of Poetry, The Book of Documents, and the literature of 14 The original song in Chinese is , , , ; , , , . James Legge translates as corresponds to the power of Heaven. The Chinese character ling has multiple meanings: it means powerful, indeed, e.g. something happens as you wished when you prayed to Heaven, which means ling , namely it works, is useful, or is powerful; ling also means soul, spirit, or will. In this poem, I translate as corresponds to the will of Heaven. As the highest deity, Heaven possesses soul, will, and a view of good and evil, not just power. As part of the story of Shun , the legendary monarch in ancient China, this poem probably was written in the Western Zhou Dynasty (see Wilkinson 1998: 473). 22 CHEN Derong the Jin (Ding 1988: 174). Recently, Kelly James Clark explained the relationship between Di or Shangdi and Tian as follows: In ancient China, Shang and Zhou theology likewise developed within a polytheistic context which included a variety of ancestral, tribal, and nature deities of, for example, storms, mountains, and the sky. During the Shang Dynasty, Di (Lord) or Shangdi (Lord Most High), held a position above the various deities and extended the domain of the divine from the Shang tribe to the universe. During the Zhou Dynasty, Shangdi underwent a partial name change to Tian (Heaven). (Clark 2006:109) In short, in the Zhou Dynasty, the Deity in heaven, Tian, referred to Shangdi, the Emperor in heaven or Lord on high, not to the human emperor. In this sense, Di or Shangdi were synonymous, which Hegel did not recognize when he mistakenly interpreted Di as referring to human emperors. Shangdi or Tian, indeed, has all kinds of characteristics that human beings possess. Chinese scholars widely affirm that Tian in ancient Chinese faiths is a personal deity. For instance, GUO Moruo says, Shangdi in the Shi (Book of Poetry), and Shujing (Classics of Books), is a completely personal deity, and Tian is able to see, listen, speak, smell, eat, act, go, think, be happy, be angry, and is able to father a son. He is fully and exactly the same as a human being (Guo 1982: 28). Julia Ching assumes that the conquest of Shang by Zhou probably led to the confusion and combination of two originally distinct cults, and to the subsequent usage of both Ti [Di] and Tien [Tian] to designate the Supreme Being, regarded as a personal God (Ching 1993: 34). 15 W. J. Clennell believes that Tian is a personal deity, although Tian, God, and Lord refer to the same entity. He says, There was belief in an over-ruling TianHeaven, or God, some time spoken of more personally as Shang Ti [Shangdi] the Lord or Lords above (Clennell 1917: 41). The historian of Chinese philosophy FENG Youlan points out that In the Shi (Book of Poetry), Shu (Classics of Books), Zuozhuan (Commentary of Zuo), Guoyu (Discourses of State), there are a lot of discourses talking about Tian (Heaven) and Di (Emperor); most of them refer to a personal God (Feng 2000: 281). Why did the ancient Chinese replace the Di or Shangdi? In addition to Julia Chings assumption of the combination of the two cults, I would further suggest that ancient Chinese gradually adopted the use of the term Tian (Heaven) instead of Shangdi, because Tian is believed to be the palace where the Shangdi lives. Thus did the ancient Chinese use the name of the palace to stand for Shangdi and so avoid speaking Shangdis name directly; in this way they showed their reverence to Shangdi. 15 Scholars differ in their opinions of when Tian began to be regarded as a personal deity. For instance, Julia Ching thinks that in the Shang Dynasty, Tian is still regarded as an impersonal deity. She says, In Shang times (c. 1766-1122 BCE), the Lord-on-high was represented as a being remote and impersonal, perhaps a creator God. I am not asserting that the ancient Chinese believed in any clear doctrine of creation. There is scant evidence for this. The speculation is based rather on a comparison between this figure and the later Chou figure called Heaven, which was much closer to the people who worshiped it, and displays more the characteristics of an ancestral deity (Ching 1993: 3334). Many other scholars, including GUO Morou and DING Shan, claim that Tian as a personalized deity first appeared before the Xia Dynasty. Another scholar WANG Jihuai suggests: In the Shang Dynasty, the concepts of Tian, Di (earth), and Shen (Deity, Spirit) have been built up clearly, and become the core of the primitive religion in ancient society (Wang 1994: 153). JIANG Guozhu asserts, in the Shang Dynasty, Chinese unified kingship on the earth, and the idea of the ultimate deity in heaven entered the religious consciousness. In peoples consciousness, they believed that there is an ultimate deity as the arbiter in the universe. This Shen was called Di, or Shangdi (Emperor or Emperor in heaven) (Jiang 1993: 21). Di and Tian in Ancient Chinese Thought: A Critical Analysis of Hegels Views 23 The personality of Tian derived from that of Shangdi, while the personal notion of Shangdi is associated with that of the Di on earth. In a certain sense, the image of Tian is the enlargement of the image of the emperor on earth, but is not the emperor himself. In order to consolidate Zhous rule, the emperor in the Zhou Dynasty created a series of regulations and laws, including various religious ceremonies. The Zhou court developed the notion of a personal Tian according to the image of the emperor. Numerous texts from the Zhou Dynasty show us that Tian was a super-ordinate deity, but with emotions, likes, dislikes, and a sense of justice. In the political system, they set up different classes: Son of Heaven (Tianzi ), Dukes and Princes, Marquis, Warriors, Eunuchs, and necromancers. The emperor, son of heaven, was the highest ruler who ruled all the other officials. Accordingly, a similar hierarchy of classes was believed to exist in the divine world. There Tian or Shangdi was the highest ruler. All kinds of shen, genii (or spirits), were under his control. It was Shangdi that designated shen or genii as responsible for different duties both in heaven and on earth. I believe that Kelly James Clarks description of the role of Shangdi is acceptable when he says, The Shang affirmed a high God (Di or Shangdi ) who reigned supreme over a host of lesser Powers and spiritual beings, including ancestors (Clark 2006: 120). In practice, the ruler needed to let his people know that his position was sacred and inviolable. He systemized previous faiths and according to social and political constructs produced a kingdom of heaven, where the highest deity rules everything, including the emperors state and the whole earth. In this sense, contrary to Hegel, it is not the emperor in the present world but Tian who rules both the natural and invisible worlds. Tian, the highest deity, is personal and his personal characteristics are similar to those of the emperor in the present world. The image of the emperor on earth is the model on which the development of the image of Tian was based. Hegels understanding of Tian lacks the recognition of the personal nature of Tian in ancient Chinese religion, so he ignores the place and role of Tian in ancient Chinese religious activities. He fails to identify exactly what the ancient Chinese worshipped. Therefore, he mistakenly believed that the ancient Chinese treated human beings, like the emperors in the present world, as the highest rulers of the present world, of nature, and of the invisible world. Hegel appropriately affirms the moral significance and function of Tian, but he fails to recognize the divinity of Tian. Hegel says, Tian is the highest, though not only in the spiritual and moral sense. This Tian designates wholly indeterminate and abstract universality; it is the wholly indetermi- nate sum of the physical and moral nexusit is the emperor and not heaven who is sovereign on earth; it is not heaven that has given or gives the laws of religion and ethical life, which human beings respect. (Hegel 19841987: 2. 549) In this respect, Hegel is mistaken. He understands Tian from the perspective of philosophy, asserting that Tian is an abstract universality, but he does not completely understand the divine feature of Tian in ancient Chinese faith. Tian is not the maker of laws in heaven and on earth; the emperor in the present world is supposed to make laws according to the will of Tian. Tian is believed to be the highest judge of all moral behavior of human beings. Even the emperor on earth has to obey the will of Tian; if he disobeys the will of Tian, he is punished. If a person does everything according to the will of Tian, he will not be ashamed before men and will not be scared of Tian (Legge 1960: 344). In Shijing, there is a poem entitled Tian Bao (The Protection of Tian): Heaven protects and establishes thee, with the greatest security; Makes thee entirely virtuous, that thou mayest enjoy every happiness; Grants thee much increase, so that thou hast all in abundance (Legge 1960: 255256). In the West, Leibniz in his Discourse: on the Natural 24 CHEN Derong Theology of the Chinese, clearly affirms, the Chinese did teach of divine things and spirits (Mungello 1977: 67). In short, Tian has will, from which we may see the personality of Tian. Tian has supernatural power, from which we may see the divinity of Tian. Tian does not live on the earth; instead, he lives in heaven and exists together with the souls of ancestors, so Tian is a spiritual being. However, Hegel thinks, Tian designates the physical power and not a spiritual deity (Hegel 19841987: 2. 549). He explains, What is called heaven here is not merely the power of nature, but the power of nature bound up together with moral characteristics, through which this power of nature dispenses or withholds its blessings according to moral deserts and conduct (Hegel 19841987: 2. 548). Hegel regards Tian as neither a spiritual power nor a natural power, but as a confluence of natural and moral power. In ancient China, people believed that various natural disasters, damage caused by wind, flood, and drought were all punishments from Tian for humans immoral behavior which violated the will of heaven. Thus, Tian was believed to have direct influence over peoples daily lives. If Tian is an empty and abstract universality, as Hegel suggests, Tian would not have moral consciousness. A purely natural or physical Tian, or an abstract universality, would not have will and moral consciousness. All these features are derived from the divinity of Tian. Curiously, since Hegel acknowledges that Tian dispenses blessings through natural power, he thus implicitly admits some personal characteristics for Tian. But since he otherwise maintains that moral characteristics cannot be attributed to Tian, Hegels explanation of Tian is thus inconsistent. Hegels misunderstanding of ancient Chinese religion is theoretically related to his philosophy of religion. Hegel thought that religion is deduced from the universal. He says, Religion is genus, and religions species. These species, however, are not to be taken empirically but must be deduced from the universal (Hegel 19841987: 2. 721). If we take Hegels theory as a universal principle and apply it to all religious traditions, we will encounter problems. In the case of ancient Chinese religion, the exact opposite of what Hegel claims is evident. The beliefs of ancient Chinese religion were not deduced from any universal premise, but were directly derived from peoples experience of daily life and their empirical observation of natural phenomena. The belief in local shen (deities) resulted from human observations, fears, and imaginations regarding natural powers, such as the movement of the sun, moon, stars, wind, rain, and thunder. Likewise, the highest deity Shangdi derived from the empirical observation of the place and power of the emperor on earth. And Tian, as the supreme being, is the conceptualization of the physical Tian (sky), which even today in China is a word that directly refers to the physical sky. The origin and development of ancient Chinese religion was a process from empirical observation to generalization from that empirical knowledge, a process entirely different from the process that Hegel describes. 4 Conclusion In the Xia Dynasty, Chinese religion did have the features of a natural religion; but during the Shang and the Zhou dynasties, primitive beliefs were developed and gradually systematized. The main objects of worship were sublimated from physical things to a spiritual entity. Hegel recognized the characteristics of the natural religion at the very beginning of ancient Chinese religion, but he failed to follow the evolution of beliefs in ancient China. He understood the place and role of the Chinese emperor in religious activities, but he exaggerated the power of the emperor and inappropriately transferred the Di and Tian in Ancient Chinese Thought: A Critical Analysis of Hegels Views 25 power of Di (Emperor) the highest deity to Di, the emperor on the earth. Hegel recognized the moral significance and function of Tian in ancient Chinese life, but he did not recognize the divinity and spiritual features of Tian. Even where he failed to understand the double references of the concept Di (Emperor), and the differences between Di and Shangdi, he still could have avoided mischaracterizing ancient Chinese religion as a natural religion if he had appropriately understood the concept Tian (Heaven), but he did not do so. Hegels misunderstanding of the three concepts Di, Shangdi, and Tian led him to mischaracterize ancient Chinese religion as a kind of natural religion in which there was no spiritual being worshiped. This mischaracterization is theoretically related to his philosophy of religion. Since Hegel presupposed philosophically that religions are deduced from the universal, and that there was no universal being in ancient Chinese religion, he accordingly excluded ancient Chinese religion from genuine or mature religion. Based on the above analyses, we have demonstrated that ancient Chinese religion went beyond the stage which Hegel called natural religion in which people worshiped only natural things to a mature religion, in which people worshiped a supreme spiritual being. References Albanese, Catherine L. 2002. Reconsidering Nature Religion. Harrisburg: Trinity Press International. Chen, Kaike 1993. An Exploration of the Secrets of Chinese Deities Guilin : Lijiang Press . Clark, Kelly James. 2006. The Gods of Abraham, Isaiah, and Confucius. Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy 5.1: 109136. Ching, Julia. 1993. Chinese Religion. New York: Macmillan Press Ltd. Clennell, Walter James. 1917. The historical development of religion in China. London: T. Fisher Uwin Publishing. De Bary, Theodore, and Irene Bloom, eds. 1999. Source of Chinese Tradition: From Earliest Times to 1600, vol. 1, 2 nd ed. New York: Columbia University Press. Ding, Shan . 1988. An Exploration of Religions and Mythology in Ancient China Shanghai : Shanghai Wenyi Chubanshe . Feng, Youlan . 2000. The Complete Works of Feng Youlan . Zhengzhou : Henan Renmin Chubanshe . Guo, Moruo . 1982. The Complete Works of Guo Moruo , vol. 1. Beijing : Remin Chubanshe . Hagen, Kurtis. 2006. Sorai and the Will of Tian. Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy 5.2: 313330. Hegel, G. W. F. 19841987. Lectures on the Philosophy of Religion. Vol. 1, 2, 3. Ed. by Peter C. Hodgson and trans. by R. F. Brown, P. C. Hodgson, and J. M. Stewart, with the assistance of J. P. Fitzer and H. S. Harris. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press. _____. 1985. Introduction to the Lectures on the History of Philosophy. Trans. By T. M. Knox and A. V. Miller. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Jiang, Guozhu . 1993. The History of Chinese Dynasties , vol. 1. Taibei : Wenjin Chubanshe . Kant, Immanuel. 1889. Religion within the Bounds of Reason, in The Critical Philosophy of Immanuel Kant, ed. by Edward Caird, LL.D., Vol. II. Legge, James. 1960. Shang shu/The Book King, The Chinese Classics, With a Translation, Critical and Exegetical Notes, Prolegomena, and Copious Index, vol. III. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press. Mungello, David E. 1977. Leibniz and Confucianism: The Search for Accord. Honolulu: The University Press of Hawaii. Perkins, Franklin. 2006. Reproaching Heaven: The Problem of Evil in Mengzi. Dao, A Journal of Comparative Philosophy 5.2: 293312. 26 CHEN Derong Schleiermacher, Friedrich. 1962. On Religion: Historical Selections in the Philosophy of Religion. Edited by Ninian Smart. London: SCM Press LTD. Thompson, Laurence G. 1989. Chinese Religion: An Introduction, fourth edition. Belmont, California: Dickenson Publishing Company Inc. Van Der Ven, Johannes A., Jaco S. Dreyer, and Hendrik J. C. Pieterse. 2000. Nature: A Neglected Theme in Practical Theology, Religion Theology: A Journal of Contemporary Religious Discourse 7.4: 4055. Wang, Jihuai . 1994. A History of Religions in Remote Antiquity and Three Dynasties . Beijing : Renmin Chubanshe . Wilkinson, Endymion. 1998. Chinese History: A Manual. Cambridge and London: Harvard University Press. Di and Tian in Ancient Chinese Thought: A Critical Analysis of Hegels Views 27