Reading Notes about Fung Yu-lan’s A Short History of Chinese Philosophy: Part III, the major schools of Chinese philosophy

The chapter three of this book is very short, and Mr. Fung just quotes some introductions about Chinese philosophical schools from others.

From the fifth and third centuries B.C. there were so many different schools that we now refer them as the “hundred schools.” Later historians have attempted to make a classification of these schools, and the first one to do so was Si-ma Tan, who was the father of Si-ma Qian. He classified the six major schools as: the Yin-Yang chia or Yin-Yang school, the Confucianism, the Taoism, the Mo chia or Mohist school, the Ming chia or School of Names, and the Fa chia or Legalist school.

The second one who attempted to classify the schools was Liu Xin. He classified the major schools into ten, in which six are the same as those of Si-ma Tan, and the other four schools are the Zong-Heng chia or School of Diplomatists, Za chia or School of Eclectics, Nong chia or School of Agrarians, and Xiao-shuo chia or School of story Tellers. As Mr. Fung says, what is new in Liu Xin’s work is that he traces systematically the historical origins of the different schools for the first time in Chinese history.

In the opinion of Liu Xin, there was “no separation between officers and teachers” in the early Zhou dynasty. “In other words,” said by Mr. Fung, “the officers of a certain department of the government were at the same time the transmitters of the branch of learning pertaining to that department.”[1]In that days, there were only “official learning” but no “private learning.”

This had been changed when the Zhou royal house lost its power, and the officers scattered throughout the country because they lost their former positions in government. As Mr. Fung says, the officers, “they then turned to the teaching of their special branches of knowledge in a private capacity.”[2]From then on, the different schools arose. In Chinese language, the words “Xiao Ren” and “Shu Min” respectively means “small men” and “common people” or “the mass,” which is the contrastive social class to the feudal lords who has been called “Jun Zi”—this word literally means “sons of the kings,” but was also used as a common designation of the class of the feudal lords. In the old days, “Jun Zi” were the only people who owned the land and who only had the rights and opportunities to be educated. But with the trend that the education and teaching became private and no more official, the word “Jun Zi” became to mean a person who has accepted the education, and in spite of whether he comes from landlord class or common people class. As Mr. Fung says: “with this disintegration, the former official representatives of the various branches of learning became scattered among the common people.”[3]

According to Liu Xin’s theory, each school has its origin in some kind of official service. Liu Xin has a nice and concise description about the origins of those schools, and I have to say that by comparing the statements in ancient Chinese language of Liu Xin and the the translations in English of Mr. Fung, we may almost agree with that just as the German philosophy can only be expressed in German as well as the ancient Greek philosophy can only be expressed in ancient Greek, also, the Chinese philosophy can only be expressed in Chinese language. Following are the statements of Liu Xin in the book of History of the Former Han Dynasty and the translations of Mr. Fung:

The original 1: “儒家者流，盖出于司徒之言。……游文于六经之中，留意于仁义之际，祖述尧舜，宪章文武，宗师仲尼，以重其言，于道最为高。孔子曰：‘如其所誉，其有所试。’唐虞之隆，殷商之盛，仲尼之业，已试之效者也。”

The translation 1: “The members of the Ju school had their origin in the Ministry of Education…This school delighted in the study of the Liu Yi[the Six Classics or six liberal arts] and paid attention to matters concerning human-heartedness and righteousness. They regarded Yao and Shun[two ancient sage emperors supposed to have lived in the twenty-fourth and twenty-third centuries B.C.] as the ancestors of their school, and King Wen[1120?-1108?B.C. of the Zhou dynasty] and King Wu[son of King Wen] as brilliant exemplars. To give authority to their teaching, they honored Chung-ni[Confucius] as an exalted teacher. Their teaching is the highest truth. ‘That which is admired must be tested.’ The glory of Yao and Shun, the prosperity of dynasties of Yin and Zhou, and the achievements of Chung-ni are the results discovered by testing their teaching.”

The original 2: “道家者流，盖出于史官。历记成败、存亡、祸福、古今之道，然后知秉要执本，清虚以自守，卑弱以自持，……此其所长也。”

The translation 2: “Those of the Taoist school had their origin in the official historians. By studying the historical examples of success and failure, preservation and destruction, and calamity and prosperity, from ancient to recent times, they learned how to hold what is essential and emptiness, and with humbleness and meekness maintained themselves.…Herein lies the strong point of this school.”

The original 3: “阴阳家者流，盖出于羲和之官。敬顺昊天，历象日月星辰，敬授民时，此其所长也。”

The translation 3: “Those of the Yin-Yang school had their origin in the official astronomers. They respectfully followed luminous heaven, and the successive symbols of the sun and moon, the stars and constellations, and the divisions of times and seasons. Herein lies the strong point of this school.”

The original 4: “法家者流，盖出于理官。信赏必罚，以辅礼制。……此其所长也。”

The translation 4: “Those of the Legalist school had their origin in the Ministry of Justice. They emphasized strictness in rewarding and punishing, in order to support a system of correct conduct. Herein lies the strong point of this school.”

The original 5: “名家者流，盖出于礼官。古者名位不同，礼亦异数。孔子曰：‘必也正名乎!名不正则言不顺，言不顺则事不成。'此其所长也。”

The translation 5: “These of the School of Names had their origin in the Ministry of Ceremonies. For the ancients, where titles and positions differed, the ceremonies accorded to them were also different. Confucius has said: ‘If names be incorrect, speech will not follow its natural sequence. If speech does not follow its natural sequence, nothing can be established.’ Herein lies the strong point of this school.”

The original 6：“墨家者流，盖出于清庙之守。茅屋采椽，是以贵俭；养三老五更，是以兼爱；选士大射，是以上贤；宗祀严父，是以右鬼；顺四时而行，是以非命；以孝视天下，是以尚同：此其所长也。”

The translation 6: “Those of the Mohist school had their origin in the Guardians of the Temple. The temple was built with plain wooden rafters and thatched roofs; hence their teaching emphasized frugality. The temple was the place where the Three Elders and Five Experienced Men were honored; hence their teaching emphasized universal love. The ceremony of selecting civil officials and that of military exercises were also held in the temple; hence their teaching emphasized the preferment of virtue and ability. The temple was the place for sacrifice to ancestors and reverence to fathers; hence their teaching was to honor the spirits. They accepted the traditional teaching of following the four seasons in one’s conduct; hence their teaching was against fatalism. They accepted the traditional teaching of exhibiting filial piety throughout the word; hence they taught the doctrine of ‘agreeing with the superior.’ Herein lies the strong point of this school.”

The original 7：“纵横家者流，盖出于行人之官。孔子曰：‘诵《诗》三百，使于四方、不能颛对，虽多亦奚以为?’又曰：‘使乎!使乎!’言其当权事制宜，受命而不受辞。此其所长也。”

The translation 7: “Those of the Diplomatist school had their origin in the Ministry of Embassies.…[They taught the art of] following general orders[in diplomacy], instead of following literal instruction. Herein lies the strength of their teaching.”

The original 8：“杂家者流，盖出于议官。兼儒墨，合名法，知国体之有此，见王治之无不贯。此其所长也。”

The tradition 8: “Those of the Eclectic school had their origin in the Couneillors. They drew both from the Confucianists and the Mohists, and harmonized the School of Names and the Legalists. They knew that the nation had need of each other, and saw that kingly government should not fail to unite all. Herein lies the strong point of this school.”

The original 9：“农家者流，盖出于农稷之官。播百谷，劝耕桑，以足衣食。……此其所长也。”

The tradition 9: “Those of the Agricultural school had their origin in the Ministry of Soil and Grain. They taught the art of sowing the various kinds of grain and urged people to plow and to cultivate the mulberry so that the clothing and food of the people would be sufficient…Herein lies the strong point of this school.”

The original 10: “小说家者流，盖出于稗官。街谈巷语、道听途说者之所造也。……如或一言可采，此亦刍尧狂夫之议也。”

The translation 10: “Those of the School of Story Tellers had their origin in the Petty Offices. This school was created by those who picked up the talk of streets and alleys and repeated what they heard wherever they went.…Even if in their teaching but a single word can be chosen, still there is some contribution.”

In the opinion of Mr. Fung, the teachers of different Chia were specialists in varying different branches of learning and of the arts. Therefore he gives a summaries of above words that:

“Members of the Ju school had their origin in the literati.

“Members of  the Monist school had their origin in the knights.

“Members of the Taoist school had their origin in the hermits.

“Members of the School of Names had their origin in the debaters.

“Members of the Yin-Yang school had their origin in the practitioners of occult arts.

“Members of the Legalist school had their origin in the ‘men of methosds.”[4]

[1] Fung Yu-lan. A Short History of Chinese Philosophy. The Free Press, 1948, p.32.

[2] Ibid.

[3] Ibid.,P.36.

[4] Ibid.,p.37.