We have somehow opened up a little about the idea of Chun Tzu in my previous paper, which is then defined as the ‘superior man’; the ideal character which the people must observe as their role model in living out their life. Now, let us undertake deeper the Chun Tzu; the characteristics that consist the said ideal individual. In listing down such characteristics, Confucius was able to devise a philosophy which lies on the ethical way of living life that is basically concentrated to that of his/her fellow people. Ethics though, is usually mistaken to be that of the standards suggested by a certain etiquette. Well actually, when we say ‘etiquette’, it suggests a certain rule of a socially acceptable behavior; meaning it is formulated under a certain social system or situation which is unlike to that of ‘ethics’ which is primarily the moral conduct that is ought to be abided by the people for theirselves (and not for the good of any system), suggested or not by any social order. Principally, ‘etiquette’ is about having “good manners”, while ‘ethics’ is about having the right conduct. (Sir Rex Rola, Etiquette to Ethics, Dec. 10, 2012)
Now, in living an ethical way of life, as suggested by Confucius, one must observe first human-heartedness. As what it was said in the Analects, loving others can be understood by means of “offering one’s heart to another as if it was a dish to be served using a plate”. Other accounts in the Analects though say that a man of humanity knows how to love and hate; how one should feel when he/she is loved and how one also should feel when he/she is being hated. And since the said man knows how to love and hate, he/she also knows when it is appropriate to be used, for he/she cannot just simply love one and hate another. What is then the right way? It is to love the good, and to hate the bad; to desire for the upright and to despise the evil. And by despising the evil, one can then be free from such deformity. But then again, one must first know, what is good and distinguish it to what is evil by means of sticking to the custom of conduct; the ethics, for sometimes, one becomes bad not because one chooses and does unscrupulous acts, but because one doesn’t know what he/she is doing is actually ethically indecent and therefore should be avoided.
There are also cases in which one knows that what he/she is doing is not for the good, but since there are incentives in which he/she can acquire by doing so, he/she will tolerate it. But then again, what the ideal human being must be is someone who is more concerned of the others than that of his/her self. If one is to talk about incentives or benefits, one must it to be for him/her self, but rather for the others. Now, in order to practice such humanness of one, he/she must be, according to Confucius (17:6): (1) Earnest, he/she must be dealt with the others, again, he/she must also think what would be also good for others. (2) Widely open-minded, he/she must be wide-ranged and must perhaps welcome all of his/her fellows and associates, without being myopic in a sense that he/she is only concerned of the few, and not of the all or many. (3) Truthful and sincere, he/she must be believable for the others in a way that what he/she says is in accordance to his/her action, or simply of the truth. (4) Diligent, he/she must be consistent to his/her actions/values/principles and is therefore constant and precised by means of not being unstable and volatile to the point that he/she becomes absurd in the eyes of the others. And lastly, (5) Generous, similar to that of being earnest, but somehow gives importance to the value of what is being shared to those of the others, so he/she must be kind-hearted enough to give something wholeheartedly, without asking for any proceeds or benefits. In short, and if we are to summarize the principle of humanness into one word, it is “others”. For it is the others whom one, in order to be a man of humanity, should confer over his/her personal and selfish preferences. It is the others whom he/she gives value upon. And it is the others who is the important factor, the very root in which a man of humanity is made for.
Now, since we know that is the not only oneself but also the others who are prioritized in such principle of ‘jen’, we are now to ask ourselves: By what certain manifestations can all of these be upheld? Or simply, what are these particular expressions in practicing humanness? According to Confucius, there are two ways, ‘Chung’ and ‘Shu’. These two, however, is mentioned by Confucius to be of a single nature, but is somehow distinguished for the emphasis of their distinct exploitations. In the Analects, it was described that a man of ‘jen’ is a person who desires to sustain his/her self and at the same time the others just as we have mentioned earlier. In other words, to be able to make an equivalent treatment from that of ourselves to those of the others, is also to practice the way of ‘jen’. Chung, or conscientiousness to others is the first way of expressing humanness, according to Confucius. Now, it differs from that of Shu, because it somehow celebrates the positive idea of the said practice which is : “To do to others what you wish for yourself”. As what it was said in the Chung Yung, a chapter of the Li Chi or the “Book of Rites”: “One must serve his/her father as one would require for his/her son to serve him/her”. It is then setting the example to others as you want them to behave to you. On the other hand, Shu, acclaims the negative aspect of the said practice. It focuses on the idea wherein: “One must do not do to others, what he/she wishes not to be done to him/her”. According again to the Li Chi, in it’s chapter Ta Hsueh: “Do not use what you dislike in your superiors in the employment of your inferiors, and at the same time, do not use what you dislike in your inferiors in the service of your superiors...”. In other words, it is putting in an equal and fair treatment, both positively and negatively, that one can exercise the humaness inside hime/her. Thus, in order to become the ideal man referred by Confucius, one must be able to observe ‘jen’, as one of his/her virtue; the very essence that consists in loving others, as well as the self. But somehow, the idea of ‘jen’ is not just to denote a kind of virtue, but also to consider all the virtues combined. As for Fung Yu-Lan, Such term of “man of jen” becomes synonymous with the man of all-round virtue. Thus, in such contexts, ‘jen’ can be translated as the “perfect virtue” (Fung Yu-Lan, 1976).
Since we have opened up the thing about the other virtues, let us now give way to the such which was described to be the virtues that ‘jen’ is comprised with. But then again, even of such description, we still need to value these following virtues as if they are independent to that of the idea of ‘jen’. First is‘Yi’, or righteousness or justice. Yi is basically the idea of fairness in which an individual should observe with his/her fellow people in order to become an ideal man. Fairness, in the sense that one’s way of life is equitable to that of the others. If the others are to have a tedious work yet still have only an average kind of a living, one must also be able to observe justice that he/she must not have a simple work yet still have a wonderful status of living. In short, and as what the Analects said: “The ideal man understands righteousness, the non-ideal man understands profit”. Thus, the ideal man is indeed unselfish enough to think of his/her personal profit, which somehow vindicates the idea of the ideal man as also a “man of others”, not of his/her self, which is mentioned in the notion of ‘jen’.
Second virtue is ‘Li’, or propriety or appropriateness. Li, on the other hand, talks about the idea of the ideal man as disciplined in such a way he/she sees what is to be and what is not to be. Such discipline though refers to that of the customary and traditional way of things. Like for example, in the Analects 3:17, it was said that Tzu-Kung, a follower of Confucius, wanted to do away the sacrificing of the sheep at the announcement of each New Moon. The Master then said to him that in that way, he respects Tzu-Kung’s grudge for the sheep, but the thing is, Tzu-Kung must also observe that it is for the ritual, and the Master indeed, loves the ritual. Such scenario tells us the significance of following the habituated of the many over that of one’s private and personal preferences. That in order to attain what is then right and proper, “one must honor the worthy”, which worthy in the general sense, therefore is also honored by the others, and somehow live their lives in accordance to it [Doctrine of the Mean]. Thus, it still remarked the idea of ‘jen’, the idea wherein one, somehow again, preferred the good of the others than of his/her mere self. And now lastly, the ‘Chih’, or wisdom. Wisdom here, as how Confucius would define it in the means of interpreting out its Chinese character, is “to speak like an arrow, straight and true”. Well, a speech or a statement will be considered to be ‘straight and true’ if put into action. If one would say this or that, he/she must justify such through the use of action or deed or any ways possible that the others will perceive the truth value of such words. For example, if an ideal man happened to promise that he/she will give all the services we need, he/she must prove it by making it true-to-life by somehow doing things in accordance to his/her promise, that really he will give us services. Therefore, the ideal man here as wise, is totally accurate in his/her words by being able to comply such in his/her actual efforts for the good of the others who he/she gave his/her words. Thus, again, emphasizes the thought of the ‘jen’ as the love of others.
If we are to look sensitively, we can see a lot of “others” in the characteristics of the ideal man, as being said by Confucius. It is generally because such again is the main subject of his philosophy. Therefore, the basic anticipation to be grasped here is the suggestion of an ethical way man should live out his/her life that is primarily intended for the good of his/her fellow people. Ethical again for the sense that such enumaration of the said characteristics suggest the basic moral conduct of a person; and not just a socially-accredited protocol. And for others, because it is basically, not for the mere self of a person. Now, the question is, in the case of justice, if one is to think mostly of the others, how about his/her self? who will going to put him/her first, since he/she only puts his/her self after that of the others? Logic then tells us that, since all of us are somehow expected to be the ideal man, therefore all of us is to follow the said characteristics mentioned earlier, thus, the others who you prioritize will be the one now who will prioritize you. Happy? But then again, we must not think of that, for as ideal men, we are not to expect anything in return, for if we are to do so, we are not an ideal man. What the point is, we need not to worry about ourselves, let others give precedence to us for it will just come naturally, and so, there’s no need for us to campaign about it.
(REFERENCES ARE TO BE UPDATED)
References:
*(1938, Waley, A. “The Analects of Confucius”. USA. George Allen & Unwin, Ltd. )
*(1948, Fung Yu-Lan. “A Short History of Chinese Philosophy”. New York, NY 10020.. Simon and Schuster Inc.)
No comments:
Post a Comment