What Is Cultural Research on Yangming Studies?*

Wu Zhen

Abstract: Although Yangming Studies may undoubtedly be considered a line of philosophical inquiry, it is at the same time an “intellectual—cultural” system. The phenomenon of “Yangming culture” emerging during the late Ming dynasty demonstrates how the society of the time was progressing in terms of diversity in its intellectual culture. Although it remains diffi cult to defi ne “culture” clearly to this day, through etymological research, we can fi nd that the three ancient Chinese concepts of wenhua (culture), wenming (civilization), and renwen (forms of humanity) are interrelated. Confucianism, with its sustained humanistic tradition, was an intellectual indicator, one that formed an important foundation for traditional Chinese culture. From a cultural viewpoint, Wang Yangming’s Confucian theory of the mind and human nature has a constructive effect on re-establishing the humanistic order. In addition to this, Yangming Studies became a cultural import for East Asian areas such as the Joseon kingdom of Korea and Japan in the Edo period, despite being subject to profound alterations and acclimation there. Such intercultural exchanges can be more deeply explored to the benefit of finding new perspectives on the cross-regional, crosscultural aspects of both Yangming culture and Confucianism.

Keywords: Yangming culture, intellectual—cultural, forms of humanity, civilization

In the recent history of China, “culture” is most frequently understood as an intellectual or institutional issue, one that is both stubborn, long-standing, and ever-present. Currently, a wave of “new culture-fever” is in progress, with the sixteenth-century Yangming Studies (yangmingxue陽明學) having become an important focus of contemporary research into traditional culture. The teachings of Wang Yangming 王陽明 (Wang Shouren 王守仁, 1472—1529) are usually regarded as a traditional system of philosophical ideas within the Confucian Learning of the Mind (xinxue心學). However, beyond this, as a classic cultural phenomenon, Yangming Studies touch upon a wide variety of subject areas, and cannot be viewed narrowly as “philosophy” in the strict Western sense of the word. Yangming studies had a lasting effect on culture throughout the late Ming period (1368—1644), and it is not out of place to refer to this as a “Yangming culture.”

Culture, Civilization, and the Forms of Humanity [Refer to page 15 for Chinese. Similarly hereinafter]

Why should we look at Yangming Studies as a cultural phenomenon?

To begin with, what is “culture”? Although defi nitions of concepts such as culture and civilization vary widely from scholar to scholar,1Deng Weizhi 鄧偉志, “‘Civilization’ Is a Long Road: Reading Elias’s über den Proze? der Zivilisation” [“文明”是個漫長的過程——讀埃利亞斯的《文明的進程》], preface to Norbert Elias, über den Proze? der Zivilisation: Soziogenetische und Psychogenetische Untersuchungen [文明的進程——文明的社會發生和心理發生的研究], translated by Wang Peili 王佩莉 and Yuan Zhiying 袁志英 (Shanghai: Shanghai Translation Publishing House, 2018), 2.we can undertake an etymological study of these concepts, exploring where they come from and what they mean. According to the “Commentary on the Decisions” [彖傳] of theBook of Changes, “The fi rm and the yielding unite alternately and construct forms: these are the forms of Heaven. Having form, clear and thereby still: these are the forms of humanity (renwen人文). If the forms of Heaven are contemplated, the changes of time can be discovered. If the forms of humanity are contemplated, one can shape the world under Heaven.”2The English translations are based on Richard Wilhelm and Cary F. Baynes, trans., I Ching or Book of Changes (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1968), 495. Wang Bi’s 王弼 commentary is supplemented to fi ll in a gap in the original text in Wilhelm’s translation.This is the origin of the idea ofren wen hua cheng人文化成 (transformation through the forms of humanity), later condensed into the wordwenhua文化 (culture) in the Chinese language. There would be no possibility of “contemplating the forms of humanity and shaping the world under Heaven” without the prerequisite condition of civilization (wenming文明). This shows how intimately linked the ideas of culture and civilization were in ancient China, with their shared origin in the word-root ofwen文 (form, pattern, writing).

The “Appended Remarks II” [系辭下] of theBook of Changesoff ers a clearer defi nitive description of the meaning of the characterwen, “When things intermingle, this is called pattern.” If we extrapolate from this,wenindicates a state where things are intermingled to create a pattern. The “Record of Music” [樂記] in theBook of Ritessays, “The five colors form a complete and elegant pattern, without any confusion,”3The English translation is based on James Legge’s version, with some amendments.indicating that herewenis used in the sense of various things mixed together, and that this variety of things implies the question of a proper order. TheExplaining Graphs and Interpreting of Chinese Characters[說文解字] offers the following explanation, “Wen文, intersecting strokes, is like an interlocking pattern.”4Xu Shen 許慎, Explaining Graphs and Interpreting of Chinese Characters [說文解字], vol. 9, ed. Xu Xuan 徐鉉 (Beijing: Zhonghua Book Company, 2013), 182.Wen文 andwen紋 (lines, veins, grain) were often used interchangeably.5Zhu Junsheng 朱駿聲, Rearranged and Annotated Explaining Graphs and Interpreting of Chinese Characters [說文通訓定聲], vol. 15 (Wuhan: Wuhan Ancient Texts Bookshop, 1983), 777.The definition does not refer to any specific object, but to various possible states of existence. As the concept ofwenbecame increasingly clarifi ed, an idea of civilization formed and eventually developed into an idea of the world of humanity. On the other hand, the progression from “contemplating the forms of humanity” to “shaping the world under Heaven” implies the formation of a world of “human culture.” We observe that theBook of Changesdescribes the formation of human civilization as a process of “civilization” developing into the “forms of humanity,” and finally attaining the level of “human culture.” The “forms of humanity,” corresponding to the “forms of Heaven” (tianwen天文), are a crucial element. In essence, both civilization and culture are issues concerned with the forms of humanity, made possible through the awakening of human consciousness. In this sense, culture is a creative pursuit of humankind.

According to studies in cultural anthropology, the development of ancient cultures usually conforms to two stages: a fi rst seeing humanity as under the domination of Heaven or a spiritual deity, such as the Xia (ca. 2070—1600 BCE) and Shang (1600—1046 BCE) people’s belief in deities and spirits; and a second seeing humanity begin to develop selfawareness, as in the Western Zhou period (1046—771 BCE) when the concept of “virtue” appeared. The absolute nature of dominating power declines as self-awareness grows, and we see a cultural question of “using the forms of humanity to shape the world under Heaven” appear.6Lao Sze-kwang 勞思光, Cultural Philosophy Lectures [文化哲學講演錄] ed. Lau Kwok-ying 劉國英 (Hong Kong: The Chinese University of Hong Kong Press, 2002), 72.Ever since the late Zhou period, humanism became a signifi cant feature of early traditional Chinese culture, mainly represented by such thinkers as Confucius, Laozi, of the Confucian and Daoist schools respectively. Ancient Chinese culture, formed from Confucian and Daoist thought, was a culture of humanism, distinctly diff erent to a culture based on religion.

From the basic idea ofwen文, the two concepts of “culture” and “civilization” emerged in the ancient Chinese linguistic context, and from a philosophical perspective these can be either specifi c or general, which combined together form the characteristics of either culture or civilization. What is significant here is that, in the process of a culture or civilization developing, the budding awareness of the forms of humanity is a necessary factor.

If we are to consider the question of what is meant by culture or civilization from the perspective of modern research on civilization, we might refer to the related work of Norbert Elias. In his monograph,The Civilizing Process, Elias discussed how words like “culture” and “civilization” have different connotations across different European languages. In the context of Anglo-French languages, “civilization” indicates politics, economy, religion, morality, social reality, and so on whilst in Germanic languages, “Kultur” means thought, art, and religion, and as such is separate from politics, economy, and social reality. “Civilization” in Anglo-French languages may be taken as equivalent to “culture” in Germanic languages. Summarizing, we fi nd that the idea of “civilization” minimizes the disparity between peoples, because it places an emphasis on human commonality, whilst the Germanic idea of “Kultur” instead focuses on the distinctions between diff erent peoples and the unique characteristics of those groups. “Whereas the concept of ‘civilization’ has the function of giving expression to the continuously expansionist tendency of colonizing groups, the concept of ‘Kultur’mirrors the self-consciousness of a nation.”7Norbert Elias, The Civilizing Process: Sociogenetic and Psychogenetic Investigations, rev. ed., trans. Edmund Jephcott, eds. Eric Dunning, Johan Goudsblom, and Stephen Mennell (Carlton, Victoria: Blackwell Publishing, 2000), 7.

According to the above statements, “civilization” represents a tendency for various peoples to develop toward a common goal, whereas “culture” emphasizes instead the specifi c achievements of a people, region, or area. Ge Zhaoguang 葛兆光 sums up Elias’s research, saying, “Civilizations tend toward similarity as history progresses forward,” “that is to say that culture reveals dissimilarity, whilst civilization tends toward similarity.”8Ge Zhaoguang 葛兆光, Lectures on the History of Thought: Field of View, Perspective, and Methods [思想史研究課堂講錄：視野、角度與方法] (Beijing: SDX Joint Publishing Company, 2005), 205.Although culture does indeed entail specificities that differ according to ethnic groups, civilization may not in fact imply absolute similarity, since civilizations present themselves as diff ering cultural states, which means that civilizations entail diff erence as well. American political scientist Samuel Huntington’s theory of the “clash of civilizations” aimed at exposing the fact that culture and civilization are co-existent, with him asserting that there will never be a single, unifying culture on earth. Clashes between civilizations occur because of confl icts in cultural elements, and improved communication between civilizations is the best way to prevent further confl icts from arising.9Samuel Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order (1996). Translated by Zhou Qi 周琪 et al. as [文明的沖突與世界秩序的重建] (Beijing: Xinhua Publishing House, 2010), 1.As a result, it is not sensible to overly emphasize the specifi cities of culture and overlook communication between civilizations, because any commonality between civilizations can only develop healthily on the basis of the variety of culture.

With the emergence of postmodernism came the urge to fi nally dispel traditional ideas about the rigorous distinction between culture and civilization. Take, for example the work of Japanese scholar Ogura Kizō 小倉紀蔵 who holds that both culture and civilization contain a tension between specificity and universality, and that their differences are thus irreducible. He believes that civilization-centrism is a term representing “modernity,” whilst in fact every area or people have their own civilization, just as Japan and Korea do, even down to smaller areas such as Okinawa, Hokkaido, and Sakhalin, each of which also has its own specifi c civilization. He emphasizes that “if we are unable to change our ideas, all the countries of East Asia could only ever revolve around the civilizational center of China.”10Ogura Kizō, What Is East Asia?: From the Perspective of Civilization and Culture [東アジアとは何か——「文明」と「文化」から考える] (Fukuoka: Gen Shobō, 2011), 9—10.This idea constitutes what is now popularly known as “civilizational center transfer theory” or “civilizational decentralism.” However, admitting that one culture is irreducible with another is not tantamount to denying the universal meaning of individual cultures in the history of human civilization. Contemporary New Confucian scholar Liu Shuxian 劉述先 (1934—2016) argues that anyone holding this view is eliminating the universality of specifi c cultures by holding too fast to the idea of cultural essentialism. As he sees it,

What we refer to as culture is nothing more than an empty universal noun. There has never been such a thing as a truly unifi ed Orient or China, just as there has never been such a thing as a truly unifi ed world. . . . The benefi t of this theory is that it is able to dispel the distance and limitations between cultures and peoples, and support cultural interaction on a global scale. . . . However, this viewpoint is not entirely without fl aws, which is that the purely theoretical deduction eliminates the actual differences between Occidental and Oriental cultures. It is not necessarily true, in fact, that anyone who believes in the diff erence between Eastern and Western cultures is protecting cultural essentialism.11Liu Shuxian 劉述先, New Age Philosophy Beliefs and Methods [新時代哲學的信念與方法] (Wuhan: Hubei Education Press, 2005), 162.

This conclusion largely agrees with an important viewpoint in contemporary globalism—that local knowledge with its local significance may transcend its geographical limits through the process of globalization, resulting in local knowledge being borrowed from by several diff erent areas, with a positive effect on advancing that area’s own cultural traditions. Huang Yong has said that it is precisely in this sense that the more the world becomes globalized, the more it is becoming localized, and vice versa. Hence, the times we live in has become a “global—local” time.12Huang Yong 黃勇, prologue to Ethics in the Age of Globalization [全球化時代的倫理] (Taipei: Taipei University Publishing Center, 2011), 1-2.

In conclusion, historically speaking, both “culture” and “civilization” are concerned with issues of a developing a sense of both humanity and nation. Cultural activities are more than simple material pursuits, they are creative activities on the higher level of spirit and values, and it is necessary to transcend the human natural state in developing self-awareness. As an awareness of the forms of humanity develops all kinds of cultural issues emerge. Unlike a culture based on religion, a humanistic culture such as that represented by Confucianism is mainly characterized by cultural aims and social responsibilities such as “shaping the world under Heaven.” This means that Confucian culture not only engages with society and has a sense of responsibility, but moreover has the ultimate aim of “self-transformation” in order to be able to achieve “social transformation.”13Lao, Cultural Philosophy Lectures, 81.

Yangming Studies as a Form of Culture [18]

Without doubt, Yangming Studies revived the Learning of the Mind tradition in Confucianism, as well as being a creative progression of the Confucian culture based on the works of Confucius and Mencius. It embodied both a philosophical quality in the premodern sense, as well as a theoretical form in the sense of traditional culture. As a philosophical theory, the ultimate cultural mission of Yangming Studies had two sides: achieving both selftransformation and social change based on the universal awareness of values found in intuitive knowing (liangzhi良知). This two-tier transformation shared a common aim to reestablish the spirit of humanism.

Examining the theoretical structure of Yangming Studies we find that at its core was the concept of intuitive knowing, an internalized order of the human mind that carries connotations of moral subjectivity, whilst pointing a way to social order through the externalization of “the mind as Heaven”14Wang Shouren 王守仁, “Reply to Ji Mingde” [答季明德], in vol. 6 of Complete Works of Wang Yangming [王陽明全集], eds. Wu Guang 吳光 et al. (Shanghai: Shanghai Classics Publishing House, 1992), 214.and “intuitive knowing as the principle of Heaven”15Wang Shouren, “Instructions for Practical Living II” [傳習錄中], in Instructions for Practical Living, ed. Wu Zhen 吳震 (Beijing: National Library of China Publishing House, 2018), 300.as objective spirit. Hence, Wang Yangming stated, “Humankind is the mind of Heaven, Earth, and the myriad things; the mind is the master of Heaven, Earth, and the myriad things.”16Wang Shouren, “Reply to Ji Mingde,” 214.

Superficially, these assertions of Wang Yangming’s may appear somewhat opaque if viewed through the lens of modern philosophy. How exactly the human mind, as a subjective existence, can be the master of Heaven, Earth, and the myriad things seems to be entirely missing the process of conceptualization. In fact, the point of Yangming Studies was to re-establish the unity of the principle of Heaven and intuitive knowing, and of the human mind with the myriad things. According to the Yangming School, the world is not lacking in vitality, nor mechanistic in nature, or a series of unconnected things, but a unifi ed and meaningful whole intimately connected with human survival, that is, the world we live in is a humanistic world, where the people and the myriad things constitute “the benevolence of a single body.”17Wang Shouren, “Inquiry on the Great Learning” [大學問], in vol. 26 of Complete Works of Wang Yangming, 967. Wu Zhen, “On Wang Yangming’s Ideas of Benevolence from the ‘Benevolence Forms One Body with the Myriad Things’” [論王陽明“一體之仁”的仁學思想], Philosophical Research [哲學研究], no. 1 (2017): 61-67.This may also be seen as an interpretation of the traditional Chinese world view in which “Heaven and humankind are united as one,” and “the myriad things form one body.” From an axiological perspective, “unifi cation” indicates the possibility of a cultural world with humanistic values constructed by human activity, whilst the values and significance that allow for the existence of the objective world originate in the subjective existence of humanity. As a result, although generally speaking intuitive knowing means the moral awareness of the human mind, ultimately the order of the cultural world and the forms of humanity is dependent on the structuring function of social conscience. As a direct consequence of this, Wang Yangming stated, “Intuitive knowing is the numinous spirit of creation. These spirits give rise to Heaven and Earth, forming ghosts and lords, such that all come from this, and it is without equal among objects.”18Wang Shouren, “Instructions for Practical Living III” [傳習錄下], in Instructions for Practical Living, 423.“Creation” as mentioned here is not the creation of something from nothing, but one which emphasizes intuitive knowing as a Heavenly principle that is actually existent and the basis for the existence of all living things. At the same time as he emphasized that intuitive knowing is existent universally, he admitted that this absolute existence must present itself as an entire axiological world, which is why he said, “Originally, Heaven, Earth, the myriad things, and humankind originally form one body,”19Ibid., 428.meaning that the life-world of humankind along with the natural world come together to form a “single co-existing body” world of humanity—a cultural world with humanistic values at its core.

In order to better understand the theory of a unifi ed world in Yangming Studies, one must grasp the essential components of its thinking. Fundamentally speaking, Yangming Studies comprises a system of theoretical philosophy, the ultimate concern of which is to emphasize the core issue of Confucianism: to perfect the self and accomplish “selftransformation.” The important theme of Confucianism—social transformation—can only be achieved through the individual practice of intuitive knowing. For Wang Yangming, the spirit of practicing intuitive knowing, what he called “the intuitive knowing of the mind is what is called sagely,”20Wang Shouren, “Written to Wei Shimeng” [書魏師孟卷], in vol. 8 of Complete Works of Wang Yangming, 280.must show its true value through everyday practice and social application. However, as an inner spirit of people, how is intuitive knowing to be put into practice as a social behavior that can achieve social transformation? This question touches upon the overall understanding of intuitive knowing on the levels of both substance and function. On the one hand, intuitive knowing can be understood as our awareness of morality, which is the function of intuitive knowing. On the other hand, intuitive knowing is an eternal principle of Heaven. How is such a principle embodied as intuitive knowing to develop into something externalized21Lao Sze-kwang adopted a cultural philosophy perspective in his analysis of Hegel’s philosophy, believing that Hegel’s entire philosophical project was a “cultural theory model,” his so-called absolute mind and unique entity eventually “externalizing itself” into a cultural world, which can be called an “externalized cultural model.” Although “externalization” is Hegel’s own term (cf. The Science of Logic), he does not use this term extensively, preferring the idea “realization,” meaning that the absolute mind must realize itself in the world, hence “externalization” is not to “make apparent,” but a concept with its own unique sense from Hegel’s philosophy (See Lao, Cultural Philosophy Lectures, 122—125). Yangming Studies emphasize that the value of the spirit of intuitive knowing can only be manifested through the process of “functioning and fl owing,” and this so-called “functioning” is also a process of externalization.like a perfected world? This is the issue Wang Yangming was most keenly concerned with.

According to the thread of Wang Yangming’s thought, intuitive knowing is internal, but also universal amongst all humankind, even sharing a commonality with the ultimate existence of Heavenly principle. “Intuitive knowing is where Heavenly principle is illuminated and aware. Therefore intuitive knowing is identical with Heavenly principle.”22Wang Shouren, “Instructions for Practical Living II” [傳習錄中], in Instructions for Practical Living, 300.This is a key conceptualization of intuitive knowing from Wang Yangming’s later work, showing that intuitive knowing is not purely an awareness of moral judgment, but moreover a spiritual source founded in Heavenly principle. In other words, intuitive knowing has to be the direct representation of Heavenly principle, and Heavenly principle has to be the direct representation of intuitive knowing. In this sense, one might say that Wang Yangming’s thought is a kind of moral realism—believing that the self-fulfilling moral quality of intuitive knowing is an objective fact of the inner world of humanity. However, at the same time, Wang Yangming affirmed that intuitive knowing as the substance of the mind must be externalized into general behavior, hence a person’s intuitive knowing can possess a driving force for cultural activity through the actions of that person.

Crucially, intuitive knowing is the direct manifestation of Heavenly principle, which must be transformed into social activities through human behavior, and then transformed through human social behavior into the cultural world. This stage in the transformation is the “externalization” of intuitive knowing, which has a constructive effect on social order. This ceaseless driving force for social transformation encourages the process of “shaping the world under Heaven,” re-establishing the unified humanistic world of “benevolence that forms one body with all.”23Wang Shouren, “Instructions for Practical Living II,” 240.

At this point it should be clear that Wang Yangming’s philosophy is not only a moral philosophy concerned with the mind, but also a cultural theory concerned with the rebuilding of social order. The fundamental concern of Yangming Studies lies in moving from improving individuals’ minds to rebuilding social order as well as the cultural world. It is not only concerned with establishing the conceptualization of intuitive knowing—even though Wang Yangming’s work on the subject of intuitive knowing is richly philosophical. In this sense, it is necessary to examine Wang Yangming’s philosophy from the perspective of cultural philosophy, as an intellectual—cultural system, or even a cultural model of the Confucian theory of the mind and human nature.

Several Features of Yangming Culture [20]

From a cultural perspective, Yangming culture manifested itself in the mid- to late Ming period in the following ways.

First, Yangming Studies and late—Ming Confucianism became increasingly secularoriented. What we call “secularism” in Western thought originally indicated the opposite of “spiritual.” Whereas in the context of traditional Chinese culture, “secular” referred to the social, and was not the opposite of the spiritual. Rather, one might say that the cultural system with Confucianism as its representative was socially oriented in and of itself, and accommodated the spiritual alongside it. The clearest sign of the secularization of Wang Yangming’s Learning of the Mind, which fl ourished in the mid- to late Ming period, was the spiritual tradition of Confucianism symbolized by Confucian or classics-based knowledge moving from social elitism toward a more secular form which aligned with the gradual commercialism and increasing level of popular culture (an increase in household books and economics compilations becoming readily available) already concurrent in the mid- to late Ming period, with Confucian secularized culture surging forth in a plethora of social phenomena. One of the intellectual—cultural reasons for this was the more secular explanation that Wang Yangming off ered for the idea of intuitive knowing in sayings such as “everyone carries a Confucius in their heart” and “the streets are fi lled with sages,” secularized teachings based around the idea that “everyone has an equal share of intuitive knowing” accelerating the rate at which Confucianism fi ltered down toward a more secular level of society.

Second, teaching activities conducted in the name of Yangming Studies encouraged the process of making late—Ming Confucianism available to the common people, giving rise to all kinds of folk varieties of Confucianism. Such changes were fi rst illustrated by changes to concepts. For example, Wang Yangming stated that “the four peoples have different professions but the same Way (dao道),”24Wang Shouren, “Epitaph for Fang Lin” [節庵方公墓表], in vol. 25 of Complete Works of Wang Yangming, 941. Translator’s note: The “four peoples” refers to the four traditional sectors of society according to profession, which were scholars, farmers, craftsmen, and merchants.which his disciple would amend to state “the four peoples have different professions but the same learning,”25Zou Shouyi 鄒守益, “Nine Instructions for Students” [示諸生九條], in vol. 15 of Complete Works of Zou Shouyi [鄒守益集], ed. Dong Ping 董平 (Nanjing: Phoenix Publishing House, 2007), 728.highlighting the social commonality between the Way and learning, eliminating any social elitist monopoly on such commodities, but more importantly loosening up the traditional concept of the four peoples, with the socio—cultural boundary between the scholar-offi cials and the common people shifting somewhat. Among Wang Yangming’s followers, the Taizhou School, of which Wang Gen 王艮 (Wang Xinzhai 王心齋, 1483—1541) was a leading exponent, proposed ideas that were closest to the lower echelons of society, and one might call it a classical example of folk Confucianism from late Ming period society.

According to textual research from the mid-Qing period (1644—1911), most members of the Taizhou School were salt carriers, woodsmen, potters, and other such lowly social positions, rather than educated scholars. However, together they would create a teaching wave that shook the times they lived in, to the extent that some offi cials would gladly bow their heads in humility to them, as if the world had gone mad.26Jiao Xun 焦循, Further Notes on the Book of Changes [易余 錄], vol. 12, in Collected Poems and Essays of Jiao Xun [焦循詩文集], ed. Liu Jianzhen 劉建臻 (Yangzhou: Guangling Publishing House, 2009), 821—822.Evidently, the Taizhou School was more concerned with education for the lower levels of society, as an important step in realizing the Confucian social ideal of “transforming the people and fostering good manners and customs.” Wang Yangming’s Learning of the Mind was more readily acceptable to the average person, as Wang Gen said, “The Way is manifested in people’s daily practice,” or late Taizhou scholar Luo Rufang 羅汝芳 (1515—1588) who said, “A young child off ering someone a cup of tea is the Way,”27Luo Rufang 羅汝芳, Record of Illuminating the Dao [明道錄], vol. 3 (Kyoto: Chinese Language Press, 1972), 108.both of which fully demonstrate the great effect that the Taizhou School had on the secularization of Confucianism in the late Ming period. This movement would see the Learning of the Mind grow ever nearer to the life of the common people, becoming an educational idea that could make people upright and change folk habits.

Third, the religious tendency in Yangming Studies and late—Ming Confucianism. Several intellectual phenomena arose as a result of Yangming Studies in late Ming society, one of which was the unification of the three teachings (Confucianism, Daoism, and Buddhism). While Wang Yangming was already open to relating the three forms of teachings, Wang Ji 王畿 (1498—1583) went further with the saying, “intuitive knowing is the delimitation of the three teachings,” meaning that the theory of intuitive knowing and the mind transcend the bounds of the three teachings and have theoretical universality, an indication of how late—Ming culture was developing into a more varied and accepting one. Several Learning of the Mind scholars in the late Ming period began to attend to the educational potential of religious culture, believing that they could make use of the style of moral guidance texts from the Buddhist and Daoist traditions, such as “Accounts of Merits and Demerits”[功過格] to encourage the re-establishment of social order, adopting the religious approach of correcting one’s errors and repenting one’s sins, lending a distinctly religious tone to Confucian ethics. Wang Ji’s disciple Yuan Huang 袁黃 (style named Liaofan 了凡, 1533—1606) was an important figure in adopting religious approaches to encouraging good behavior, and his moral codes such as “Accounts of Merits and Demerits,” “Record of Hidden Virtue” [陰騭錄], and “Chapter on Establishing Oneself” [立命篇] all became popular bestsellers in the late Ming period. Their infl uence only spread further in the Qing period, being called “sagely books” by scholars, and becoming widely known by most of society.28Zhang Lüxiang 張履祥, “To He Shangyin” [與何商隱], in vol. 5 of Complete Works of Master Yang Yuan [楊園先生全集], ed. Chen Zuwu 陳祖武 (Beijing: Zhonghua Book Company, 2002), 117. Peng Shaosheng 彭紹升, “Yuan Liaofan’s Biography” [袁了凡傳], in vol. 45 of Biographies of Scholars [居士傳] (Yangzhou: Guangling Classics Engraving and Printing Press in Jiangsu Province, 1991), 619.This only goes to show us just how powerful and influential ideas such as “turning misfortune into fortune” and “karmic retribution” were in the culture of the time. With many followers of Wang Yangming taking part in such teaching methods, the movement to encourage good behavior became intertwined with the Learning of the Mind, with religious ideas appearing in the mouths of its scholars,29Wu Zhen 吳震, The Movement for Encouraging Good Behavior at the late Ming and Early Qing Periods [明末清初勸善運動思想研究], rev. ed. (Shanghai: Shanghai People’s Publishing House, 2016), 89-92.such as, “ghosts and spirits are always looking on” (a saying attributed to Wang Ji), “the Lord on High watches over us daily,” and “Heavenly retribution is administered without the slightest error” (from Luo Rufang), amongst others. Ignoring this important transition toward adopting religious practices, it would be diffi cult to gain a holistic understanding of the social signifi cance of Yangming Studies at the time.

Fourth, the politicization of Yangming Studies and Confucianism in the late Ming period. In addition to affecting teaching and encouraging good behavior, in the late Ming period Wang Yangming’s Learning of the Mind had a notable effect on local regulations. In 1518, Wang Yangming published his “Local Regulations for Southern Jiangxi” [南贛鄉約] marking the beginning of such regulatory texts being produced in the Yangming tradition. In these regulations, Wang Yangming reaffirmed what Lü Dajun 呂大鈞 (1029—1080) had written in his “Lü’s Local Regulations” [呂氏鄉約] regarding the four major areas of “encouraging one another to do good, regulating one another when there is wrongdoing, combining ritual and social mores, and caring for one another during bad times,” whilst emphasizing the four tenets of “being filial to one’s parents, being respectful to one’s elder brothers and seniors, educating the younger generations, and promoting harmony in the local area.”30Wang Shouren, “Local Regulations for Southern Jiangxi” [南贛鄉約], in vol. 17 of Complete Works of Wang Yangming, 599-604.One cannot help but recall the “Public Notice Instructing the People: Six Sayings from the Imperial Edicts” [教民榜文·圣諭六言] (a.k.a. the “Six Edicts”) released by Emperor Hongwu of Ming (r. 1368—1398), which included, “Filial to parents, respectful to elders, promoting harmony in the locale, educating the younger generations, each living peaceably according to one’s own, and doing nothing that is improper.”31The Veritable Records of the Founding Emperor of Ming [明太祖實錄], vol. 255 (Taipei: Institute of History and Philology at Academia Sinica, 1966), 3677.In his Regulations, Wang Yangming does not mention the “Six Edicts” by name, whereas Wang Gen however directly declared that, “As the founding Emperor said in his ‘Public Notice Instructing the People,’ naming fi lial piety and brotherly respect as the primary principle, truly this is the greatest admonition of the ages.”32Wang Gen 王艮, “To Friends in the Southern Capital” [與南都諸友], in vol. 5 of Complete Works of Wang Xinzhai [王心齋全集] (Kyoto: Chinese Language Press, 1975), 135.From then on, Wang Dong 王棟 (1503—1581), Yan Jun 顏均 (1504—1596), and Luo Rufang of the Taizhou School, Zhou Rudeng 周汝登 (1547—1629) of the Zhejiang Branch-School, You Shixi 尤時熙 (1503—1580) of the Northern Faction of Wang Yangming’s School, along with several other scholars and gentlemen including Gao Panlong 高攀龍 (1562—1626) of the Donglin Movement at the very end of the Ming period, began to combine the “Six Edicts” with local regulations, providing political legitimacy and authority to their regulatory efforts, and bringing the late Ming period local regulatory movement to its peak. Many different versions of local regulations skillfully incorporated elements from the “Six Edicts” and other treatises on good behavior, creating the unique local regulations culture of the mid- to late Ming period. The efficacy of these texts on controlling the lower sectors of society strengthened the political functionality of Confucianism at this time. Even though the institutionalization and politicization of Confucianism can be traced back to Dong Zhongshu 董仲舒 (179—104 BCE) in the Han dynasty and his movement to make Confucianism the only legitimate teaching, the true fulfi llment of this process would only come to fruition in the mid- to late Ming period in the sixteenth century with the Learning of the Mind rapidly permeating the lower echelons of society.

As the above shows, in the mid- to late Ming period we see surprising socio—cultural and intellectual shifts, none of which can be separated from the social development of the Learning of the Mind and, crucially, the powerful social awareness of Yangming Studies.

Yangming Studies and East Asian Cultures [22]

Historically speaking, East Asia is not a purely geographical concept, but a cultural East Asia comprising several native traditions. After Chinese Yangming Studies emerged in Korea and Japan, this interaction came into contact and in some cases confl ict with various local cultures, with the adaptation and adjustments that followed forming Korean Yangming Studies (South Korean scholars also refer to South Korean Yangming Studies) and Japanese Yangming Studies with native characteristics. If we only consider Yangming Studies from a Chinese perspective, we would only be party to some of its unique characteristics; when Yangming Studies making its way into East Asia, it gained a broader sense of thought and culture. By studying this broader sense we are better able to identify what qualities are shared in common across its spread. Therefore a cross-cultural comparative approach to research is of the utmost importance.

Yangming Studies, with its roots in sixteenth century China, entered Korea in the 1520s, and Japan in the early 1600s. At that time, the three states of East Asia, namely China, Japan, and Korea, were quite disparate, culturally speaking.33Ge Zhaoguang 葛兆光, “Geographically Close but Spiritually Distant: China, Korea, and Japan after the Mid-Seventeenth Century” [地雖近而心漸遠——17世紀中葉以后的中國、朝鮮和日本], Taiwan Journal of East Asian Studies [臺灣東亞文明研究學刊], no. 1 (2006): 275-292.Korea somewhat looked down upon China, and rhetoric in Japan seeing themselves as the majority of East Asia and China as a cultural minority became popular.34Sun Weiguo 孫衛國, Ming Dynasty Banners and Belittling China [大明旗號與小中華意識] (Beijing: Commercial Press, 2007); Nobuhiro Katsurajima, Intellectual History in the Nineteenth Century: Japan as the “Other” in the Tokugawa Period [思想史の十九世紀——“他者”としての徳川日本] (Tokyo: Perikansha Publishing, 1999).One can imagine that as the cultural power of East Asian countries was in a state of turmoil and change, Yangming Studies and other Neo-Confucian teachings faced the serious challenge of being decentralized along with Chinese culture in general.

When Yangming Studies fi rst reached Korea, the Korean Neo-Confucianism established by major Confucian scholars Lee Hwang 李滉 (1501—1570) and Lee Yi 李珥 (1536—1584) was in its heyday, and the teachings of Zhu Xi were imperially approved and adopted as the offi cial thought of the state. With the arrival of Wang Yangming’s works, Lee Hwang astutely perceived that Wang’s Learning of the Mind would pose a serious threat to his Korean Neo-Confucianism and published his own “Critique ofInstructions for Practical Living” [傳習 錄論辯], offering a harsh criticism of Wang Yangming’s ideas. Korean Neo-Confucianism with Lee Hwang as its representative enjoyed absolute influence in its time and in the Joseon period that followed. More than a century later the founder of Yangming Studies in Korea, Jeong Je-du 鄭齊鬥 (courtesy named Hagok 霞谷, 1649—1736) would still be reluctant to publicly proclaim his own interpretations of Wang Yangming’s philosophy, and his own collection of writings, theCollected Works of Jeong Hagok[霞谷集] would be circulated through private collections only, never being openly printed, remaining largely undiscovered until the twentieth century. As a result, academic research on Korean Yangming Studies has only really taken off in the past three decades, with only a few minor pieces of research on it before that.35Naka Sumio, Yangming Studies in Korea: Study on the Ganghwa School in the Early Stage [朝鮮の陽明學——初期江華學派の研究] (Tokyo: Kyuko Shoin, 2013).It is rare that one finds such a uniquely intriguing prospect for research in academia as the historical phenomenon of Yangming Studies in Korea, that remained hidden on private bookshelves for so long.

However, looking at this issue from a history of philosophy perspective, the existence of Yangming Studies in Korea is a matter that is beyond doubt. No small number of underground Yangming scholars achieved great profundity in their understanding of the Learning of the Mind. For example, Jeong Je-du was concerned with key ideas in Wang Yangming’s philosophy, such as “the mind as principle,” the “extension of intuitive knowing,” and “neither good nor bad,” coming up with his own unique interpretations of these ideas. The philosophical issues concerning the Learning of the Mind that captured the attention of Korean Yangming scholars were markedly diff erent to Japanese Yangming scholars, possibly because Korean scholars of this period were already well versed in the teachings of Zhu Xi. Approaching Yangming Studies having been influenced by their training in Zhu Xi studies (zhuzixue朱子學) allowed them a certain depth in understanding.

The Yangming Studies that developed in Japan presented very diff erently. In the fi rst place, Yangming Studies was never suppressed by offi cial political channels, and as a result was able to openly compete with local ideas as well as Zhu Xi’s teachings within Japan. Second, Japanese Yangming scholars did not delve into metaphysical principles, and were more concerned with ethical implications for society.

As a founding Confucian scholar of the Edo period (1603—1868), Fujiwara Seika 藤原惺窩 (1561—1619) is seen as the representative figure of Zhu Xi studies in Japan, whilst his disciple Hayashi Razan 林羅山 (1583—1657) fulfi lled the role of head of the Tokugawa Shogunate and dedicated his efforts and those of his family to upholding and spreading the teachings of Zhu Xi. However, in records of dialogues between the two there is mention of Wang Yangming, and we fi nd Wang Yangming’s works in the private library of Hayashi Razan. This indicates that, although in the early Edo period it was Zhu Xi’s teachings that were favored and supported by official channels, there seems to have been little trouble with or oppression of reading and studying works by Wang Yangming. It is precisely for this reason that Nakae Toju 中江藤樹 (1608—1648) was able to openly praise and spread the teachings of Wang Yangming, and several of his disciples became eager proponents of Yangming Studies. However, it is not absolutely clear the route by which Nakae Toju established and developed a branch of Yangming Studies (Yōmeigaku or Yangmingism), and its social influence was limited. His interpretations of Wang Yangming retained a strong Shinto infl uence, and he lacks genuinely philosophical engagement with the theories of Wang Yangming, remaining primarily concerned with themes such as “manifesting virtue and Buddha-nature” and “the Supreme Void,” clearly deviating from the core of Wang Yangming’s ideas. Despite this, Nakae Toju’s ideas on the Learning of the Mind refl ected the confl uence of Confucianism and Buddhism which was occurring in that part of the Edo period in Japan. By 1900, Inoue Tetsujirō 井上哲次郎 (1856—1944) compiledPhilosophy of Japanese Yangmingism[日本陽明學派之哲學] and established a timeline and lineage for Japanese Yangming Studies. His timeline appears clear but in fact contains several historical assumptions, and following World War II, the Japanese academic community noted several issues with his work.

What remains relevant is the fact that Yangming Studies was able to coexist alongside Zhu Xi studies, suggesting that Japanese culture is naturally open to cultural imports, and was significantly able to draw from and assimilate them, as well as creatively localizing them within its native culture. During the Meiji period (1868—1912) there emerged an early modern swing toward Yangmingism in Japan, which sought to utilize the intellectual resources of Yangming Studies to push forward key ideas such as “ruler and subject as one body,” “loyalty and filial piety in accord” as part of a national ethical movement, including such disparate voices as nationalism and populism. The Yangmingism they sought to present was a far cry from China’s native Yangming Studies. Overall, modern Japanese scholars’ interpretations of the Learning of the Mind contain no small amount of misunderstanding, even distortion, that we will not go into further detail discussing here.36Shigehiro Ogyū, “The Founding of Modern Yangmingism in Japan: Modern Yangmingism in East Asia” [日本における“近代陽明學”の成立——東アジアの“近代陽明學”（I）], in Modernity, Asia, and Yangmingism [近代·アジア·陽明學] (Tokyo: Perikansha Publishing, 2008). Wu Zhen, “Some Thoughts on ‘East Asian Yangming Studies’: Focusing on ‘Two Types of Yangming Studies’” [關于“東亞陽明學”的若干思考——以“兩種陽明學”問題為核心], Fudan Journal (Social Science Edition) [復旦學報（社會科學版）], no. 2 (2017): 13—25.

On the whole, Yangming Studies is a philosophy, as well as a theory that touches upon politics, society, ethics, culture, and even religion. For this reason it is advisable to approach the study of it with a diverse perspective, placing Wang Yangming’s Learning of the Mind within the histories of philosophy, thought, culture, and academic studies to conduct an allround re-examination. It is also necessary to consider it from the point of view of a cultural East Asia, and make a cross-cultural exploration of Yangming Studies. By doing so we can discover that Yangming Studies is a cultural philosophy that has uniquely signifi cant theories and a corresponding value to the modern world.

Bibliography of Cited Translations

Chan, Wing-tsit, trans.Instructions for Practical Living and Other Neo-Confucian Writings by Wang Yang-Ming. New York: Columbia University Press, 1963.

Legge, James, trans.The L? K? (Book of Rites). The Sacred Books of the East, edited by F. Max Müller, vol. 27—28. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1885.

Wilhelm, Richard and Cary F. Baynes, trans.I Ching or Book of Changes. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1968.