Sei sulla pagina 1di 15

ORIGINAL PAPER

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

Potrebbero piacerti anche