Although Rujia is in the modern day inextricably associated with Kongzi, traditional accounts have generally rejected the notion that the philosopher invented an entirely new school of thought. Kongzi himself is said to have remarked “I am a transmitter and not an innovator; trusting and adoring the ancients, I would dare to compare myself to the old Peng.”1 Among Rujia Scholars, the ancient ways that Kongzi sought to transmit are best embodied in a canon of Five Classics. Among the canonical Classics is the Shujing, or the Book of Documents.
The Shujing is purportedly an anthology of court records going back to the reign of the mythical Emperor Yao. These records are collectively supposed to provide insight into the ancient ways that Kongzi and other Rujia scholars sought to emulate. In reality, however, many of the “records” are far younger than they are purported to be, as evidenced by archaeology as well as linguistic analyses of the text. A further 21 entries, though formerly viewed as authentic, have been since classed as apocrypha of the early centuries CE.2 The oldest stratum of the authentic Shujing consists of Five Proclamations by the Duke of Zhou on behalf of the underage King Cheng of Zhou. Although they date to several hundred years before Kongzi’s time, the Proclamations promote certain values that are very similar to those later embraced by Kongzi and his successors.
The Proclamations continually emphasize the importance of the present monarch following in the footsteps of his forbears, completing whatever unfinished business that they had started and constantly looking to their example for guidance. At the same time, the Proclamations also call for the maintenance of the institutions of the deposed Shang Dynasty to at least some extent: “The punishments shall be determined by what were the regular laws of Yin (Shang)/ “Your Majesty, commence the rites of Yin and sacrifice in the new city…” The Proclamations likewise call for the reigning monarch to follow the examples of the former Shang kings who were righteous.3
This submission of the reigning monarch to the guidance of his predecessors can be said to reflect an extension of the central Rujia value of filial piety. As later stated by Kongzi, a son’s duties to his father do not end with the death of the latter, but continue beyond the grave: “If for three years [the son] does not abandon the ways of his [late] father, he may be called filial.”4 In the context of kingship, this is translated into the expectation that the reigning monarch should pursue more or less the same policies as his predecessors. Having ruled in the prior generations, the kings of the former Shang Dynasty can likewise be seen as spiritual fathers to the current Zhou monarch; thus, their legacy too must be honored. This means that the ruling king should preserve the institutions of the previous dynasty and continue to follow the example of its rulers.
The calls to preserve the institutions of Shang are also very much in line with later Rujia attitudes towards tradition and innovation. Kongzi and other Rujia scholars were greatly concerned with preserving the supposed ways of wise rulers from antiquity. Indeed, the reason why the Classics including the Shujing were so prized was that they were believed to be primary sources on these ancient traditions. In practice, this meant that Rujia scholars generally preferred adhering to time-honored traditions to engaging in institutional innovation. The belief was that these ancient rulers behaved and governed in accordance with the natural order of the world; it was for this reason that their reigns were so long and prosperous. Conversely, the troubles of Kongzi’s own time were caused by the abandonment of the ways of the ancients under later Zhou rulers. The Proclamations likewise call on the reigning monarch to look to the example of former Shang kings precisely because the latter were supposed to have governed in accordance with the will of Heaven. While the Shang kings governed well, their house remained in power and the realm prospered. But when the last Shang king, Di Xin, disregarded the will of Heaven, the realm fell into disorder and decline before the Heaven-fearing kings of Zhou stepped in and replaced the Shang.5
The model of kingship portrayed in the Proclamations of Zhou bears striking parallels to that which was promoted by Kongzi and his disciples centuries later. Kongzi, who was well versed in the Shujing (at least in its contemporary form) would almost certainly been familiar with the Proclamations.6 It is very likely that the content of the Proclamations had a profound impact on the Kongzi’s beliefs. These beliefs would be passed on to the philosopher’s students from them to posterity. Thus, Kongzi was not wrong when describing himself as a “transmitter and not an innovator.”
- Analects 7.1 [↩]
- Michael Nylan, “The Documents (Shu 书),” essay, in The Five “Confucian” Classics (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2014), 123–36. [↩]
- Qiu Kong and James Legge, “Zhou Shu,” essay, in Book of Documents One of the Five Classics of Ancient Chinese Literature Compilede by Confucius. English Translation by James Legge (1815-1897) (North Charleston, SC, USA: CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform Dragon Reader, 2016). [↩]
- Analects 1.11 [↩]
- Legge, “Zhou Shu” [↩]
- Analects 7.18 [↩]