Chapter 31 chapter 31

This is what Matthew Arnold calls Christ s method in his teaching. When the poor widow gave her mite, it was not what she gave that Christ called the attention of his hearers to, but how she gave it. The moralists said, "Thou shalt not commit adultery." But Christ said, "I say unto you that whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath already committed adultery." In the same way the moralists in Confucius time said: Children must cut firewood and carry water for their parents and yield to them the best of the food and wine in the house: that is filial peity. But Confucius said, "No; that is not filial piety." True filial piety does not consist in the mere outward performance of these services to our parents. True filial piety coonsists in how, in what manner, with what spirit we perform these services. The difficulty, said Confucius, is with the manner of doing it. It is, I will finally say here, by virtue of this method in his teaching, of looking into the inwardness of moral actions that Confucius becomes, not as the Christian missionaries say, a mere moralist and philosopher, but a great and true religious teacher.

As a further illustration of Confucius method, take the present reform movement in China. The so-called progressive mandarins with applause from foreign newspapers are making a great fuss—even going to Europe and America, _trying to find out what reforms to adopt in China. But Unfortunately the salvation of China will not depend upon what reforms are made by these progressive mandarins, but upon how these reforms are carried out. It seems a pity that these progressive mandarins, _instead of going to Europe and America, to study constitution could not be made to stay at home and study Confucius. For until these mandarins take to heart Confucius teaching and his method and attend to the how instead of the what in this matter of reform, nothing but chaos, misery and suffering will come out of the present reform movement in China.

The other article in Dr. Giles "Adversaria Sinica" which I will briefly examine, is entitled_ "The four classes." The Japanese Baron Suyematzu in an interview said that the Japanese divided their people into four classes, _soldiers, farmers, artisans and warriors. Upon this Dr. Giles says. "It is incorrect to translate shih (rb) as soldier; that is a later meaning." Dr. Giles further says, "in its earliest use the word shih (dr) referred to civilians." Now the truth is just on the other side. In its earliest use, the word shih (dr) referred to gentlemen who in ancient China, as it is now in Europe, bore arms, _the noblesse of the sword. Hence the officers and soldiers of an army were spoken of as shih tsu.

The civilian official class in ancient China were called shi _ clericus. When the feudal system in China was abolished (nd cent. BC , ) and fighting ceased to be the only profession of gentlemen, this civil official class rose into prominence, became lawyers and constituted the noblese of the robe as distinguished from the shih the noblese of the sword. HE the Viceroy Chang of Wuchang once asked me why the foreign consuls who were civil functions, when in full dress, wore swords. In reply I said that it was because they were shih which in ancient China meant not a civilian scholar, but a gentleman who bore arms and served in the army. HE agreed And the next day gave orders that all the pupils in the schools in Wuchang should wear military uniform.

This question therefore which Dr. Giles has raised whether the Chinese word shih means a civilian or a military man has a great practical interest. For the question whether China in the future will be independent or come under a foreign yoke will depend upon whether she will ever have an efficient army and that question again will depend upon whether the educated and governing class in China will ever regain the true ancient meaning and conception of the word shih not as civilian scholar, but as a gentleman who bears arms and is able to defend his country against aggression. CHINESE SCHOLARSHIP

PART I Not long ago a body of missionaries created a great deal of amusement by styling themselves, on the cover of some scientific tracts, as "famous savants" su ju (Titfill) . The idea was of course extremely ridiculous. There is certainly not one Chinaman in the whole Empire who would venture to argue to himself the Chinese word ju, which includes in it all the highest attributes of a scholar or literary man. We often hear, however, a European spoken of as a Chinese scholar. the China Review, we are told that "among the missionaries a high degree of Chinese scholarship is assiduously cultivated. " A list is then given of regular contributors, "all, " we are to believe, "well-known names, indicative of sound scholarship and thorough mastery of their subject."

Now in order to estimate the high degree of scholarship said to be assiduously cultivated by the missionary bodies in China, it is not necessary to take such high ideal standards as those propounded by the German Fichte in his lectures upon the Literary Man, or the American Emerson in his Literary Ethics. The late American Minister to Germany, Mr. Taylor, was acknowledged to be a great German scholar; but though an Englishman who has read a few plays of Schiller, or sent to a magazine some verses translated from Heine, might be thought a German scholar among his tea drinking circles, he would scarcely have his name appear as such in print or placard. Yet among Europeans in China the publication of a few dialogues in some provincial patois, or collection of a hundred proverbs, at once entitlements

a man to be called a Chinese scholar. There is, of course, no harm in a name, and, with the exterritorial clause in the treaty, an Englishman in China might with impunity call himself Confucius if so it pleases him. We have been led to consider this question because it is thought by some that Chinese scholarship has passed, or is passing, the early pioneering, and is about to enter a new stage, when students of Chinese will not be content with dictionary-compiling or such other brick-carrying work, but attempts will be made at works of construction, at translations of the most perfect specimens of the national literature, and not only judgment, but final judgment, supported with reasons and arguments, be passed upon the most venerated names of the Chinese literary Pantheon. We now propose to examine: st, how far it is true that the knowledge of Chinese among Europeans is undergoing this change; ndly, what has already been done in Chinese scholarship; rdly, what is the actual state of Chinese scholarship at the present day; and in the last place, to point out what we conceive Chinese scholarship should be. It has been said that a dwarf standing upon the shoulders of a giant is apt to imagine himel of greater dimensions than the giant; still, it must be admitted that the dwarf, with the advantage of his position, will certainly command a wider and more extensive view. We will, therefore, standing upon the shoulders of those who have preceded us , take a survey of the past, present, and future of Chinese scholarship; and if, in our attempt, we should be led to express opinions not wholly of approval of those who have gone before us, these opinions, we hope, may not be construed to imply that we in any way plume ourselves upon our superiority: we claim only the advantage of our position.