For some reason I suddenly thought of this—could Confucianism be revived? Of course, rather than “revived,” it might be better to say “created.”
Master Xianglong has the idea of establishing a “Confucian Cultural Preservation Zone”; he says:
Would Confucian culture today not last long without protection? Of course not. Although Daoism and Buddhism are also being squeezed out by modernizing culture today, they still have their “ark” and “paradise” for escaping the flood, namely their ecclesiastical communities and temples. In other words, they have their own “preservation zones.” Within that tiny bit of land around the temples, it is the abbot and the Daoist master who call the shots. Those believers, or those who take it upon themselves to carry forward the “orthodoxy” of Buddhism and Daoism at the very least, can wear their vestments, perform their rites, read their scriptures, and transmit their teachings there; thus these cultural species are not in immediate danger of perishing all at once. Confucianism is different. Before the late Qing, it was too successful; it was tied too tightly to the civil service examinations, official advancement, and “the rise and fall of the realm,” and it never thought to have its own refuge. Who would have known that once the “great unprecedented transformation in three thousand years” arrived, the examinations would be abolished, the reading of the classics would be forbidden, “modernity” would rise, and with the nest overturned, how could there be any intact eggs? “Western learning” had long since become both the “substance” and the “function,” or rather “substance and function in one.” Where, then, are we to find a complete, living form of Confucian existence today? Of course, it is not that there are no scholars who study Confucianism, sympathizers, and even a small number of believers and practitioners who aim to revive Confucianism, nor has the “Children’s Classics Reading Movement” not appeared. These are all people and things worthy of great respect and admiration, but in the end, Confucian culture as a communal mode of existence and an elite form is nowhere to be seen, and Confucianism should, at its root, be a living community and elite culture. Moreover, with the tide of modernization and globalization, even the remaining seeds of Confucian culture may be scattered to the winds. Then there will be nothing left but to go to museums, memorial halls, and academic conferences to indulge nostalgic feelings for Confucianism.
Therefore, I advocate giving Confucian culture even the lowest chance of survival—at least a chance comparable to the continuity enjoyed by Daoist and Buddhist culture. Let this cultural species, so precious to us Chinese, live on. If the forest is cut down, there will be sandstorms; if Confucian culture is completely extinguished, there may very likely be sandstorms in the mode of Chinese existence as well. And today and for the foreseeable future, a cultural preservation zone is the most effective option, if not the only option, for allowing a relatively pure living body of Confucian culture to continue.
http://www.confucius2000.com/admin/list.asp?id=2619
I generally agree with what he says: Confucian culture does need protection, because Confucianism is not merely a set of ideas in books, but also the transmission of ritual and cultivation.
But I do not quite agree with Master Xianglong’s specific proposal:
On the one hand, this can be established by analogy with the way nature preserves are set up; on the other hand, it can be established by analogy with the way the Hong Kong and Macau special administrative regions are set up, that is, as an embodiment of what may be called the “idea of China’s ancient cultural preservation zones.”
On the one hand, such a plan would be extremely difficult to realize; on the other hand, even if something like an Indian reservation were built, even if the Confucian culture within it were truly alive and not dead, the whole arrangement would still amount to segregation and further segregation. To hope that the culture inside the preservation zone would flourish and expand and in turn influence the mainstream is really too difficult. The significance that the culture inside the zone could bring to mainstream culture would not be much different from the theoretical study of Confucianism in the academy. If all those in the “secular world” who long for Confucianism ran off to the preservation zone, their direct influence on the secular world would actually be weakened.
My idea is: since Daoism and Buddhism have been able to continue because they have “ecclesiastical communities and temples,” then why can Confucianism not have them too? If Confucianism was too mainstream before the late Qing to have found a refuge in time, then now that we are talking about building something, why not try to rebuild such a refuge, instead of insisting on creating a preservation zone? It would be like being unable even to build a community park, and then trying to promote the construction of a national park. That is unrealistic.
Whether Confucianism is really a religion has always been the subject of much debate, but even if it was not before, what would be wrong with reviving it in a religious form now?
If we are talking about “temples,” Confucianism has ready-made ones: Confucian temples, Martial temples, academies, and ancestral temples in various places still remain in considerable number. But now these temples and fairs either become marketplaces, or else, like Buddhist and Daoist temples, they are worshipped in the same way; people all burn incense and kowtow alike. The difference is that Buddhist temples are very likely managed by “professional” monks, whereas Confucian temples may simply be administered by the tourism department or the government.
If Confucianism were revived in the form of an ecclesiastical community, then the first step would not be to corral the “Confucian scholars” into some special preservation zone, but rather to let them take charge of these Confucian traditional temples. In this way they would have a place to settle, and they would also have a source of income. Religious activities could be carried out in the temples; for Confucianism, these would be rites-and-music activities, reading the classics, ancestor worship, performing music, overseeing various ceremonial rites, and so on. These activities would not only be for internal amusement and self-entertainment, but could also radiate outward to the surrounding community. Confucian religious communities could run nurseries, provide private tutoring or consulting, preside over wedding and funeral rites, serve as guides in sacrificial and ceremonial activities, establish foundations to raise charitable funds, and so on. Similar to monks and Daoist priests, being a religious believer has two meanings: first, self-discipline through faith and doctrine, increasing self-identity and social respect; second, serving society as a “professional” “master of rites,” not only inheriting ritual, but also developing it.
Even if, once this happens, there will be many mixed-in opportunistic believers because of economic interests, that would be just like the situation in Buddhism and Daoism: the existence of large numbers of fake monks and frivolous monks does not mean that the entire ecclesiastical community will collapse.
Although under China’s strict controls it is almost impossible to establish a new sect or association, Confucianism, as the core of traditional Chinese culture, might still be permitted, provided that the focus is placed on the construction of ritual and ceremony while avoiding political influence, and that it submits to state regulation like other religions.
Translated from the Chinese original with AI assistance. The original text is authoritative.
Leave a Reply