[MUSIC] The Confucian Junzi is clearly someone who is devoted to learning or Xue in Chinese. This should be clear from your reading of the Analects, and this is the topic of today's discussion. Now, you may recall, Confucius said of himself that his mind was already set on learning when he was 15, when he was just a teenager. This should already alert you to the emphasis placed on learning in Confucian philosophy. Generally, the Confucius portrayed in the Analects is very humble, very modest, but Confucius seems to see himself as someone who is not only devoted to but actually also excels in learning. For example, in one instance he said that although many other people would be as conscientious and trustworthy in carrying out the duties as he was, they however would not be able to surpass him in his love for learning. And let me just cite one more example here. One of Confucius's disciples said, the Junzi realizes his Dao or Way through learning. These examples, I think, should suffice to bring out the importance of learning in Confucian philosophy. Education, of course, remains a hallmark of East Asian culture today. The influence of Confucianism is something that we will need to consider more carefully towards the end of this course. But now let's look at the Confucian understanding of learning more closely, beginning with the subject matter and the scope of learning. Based on our earlier discussion, you know that the Six Classics and the Six Arts played an important part in early Chinese education. As you read the Analects, no doubt you will have come across numerous references to the importance of poetry, of rituals, music, and history. Now, let's just look at one example together here. "If one does not learn poetry, Confucius says, one would be unequipped to speak. If one does not learn the rites, one would be unequipped to take one's stand." "Speaking," in this context, should be understood more broadly than vocabulary, important as it may be, but more substantially in the sense of saying something of value, meaning, and substance. And taking one's stand should be understood as more than knowing what to do in a ritual ceremony. In the broader sense of taking one's place as a responsible and contributing adult in society. In short, one could imagine that there was a broad curriculum involved in the Confucian conception of education. Learning widely, as opposed to narrow specialization, is in fact an ideal articulated in the Analects. This implies that what is needed in becoming a Junzi, gentleman, is an eagerness to learn and a wide intellectual horizon. The concept of "Wen," culture, should be highlighted here. It forms an important aspect of Confucian education and self-understanding. Although in modern Chinese, the word "Wen" is often used specifically to refer to writing and literature. In early China, it denotes culture as a whole as opposed to what is deemed uncultured, or shall we say even barbaric. There is a strong sense that the Junzi is a well-educated person, a person of cultural accomplishments, but this is not quite the whole picture. Consider this statement by one of the disciples of Confucius. "The Master is wonderfully adept in guiding his students step by step. He broadens me with culture and disciplines me with the Rites." Culture may be important, but learning is also about training in Li. Now, why is it necessary for learning to be disciplined by Li? It would appear that learning in culture may be necessary but not sufficient to enable one to become a Junzi. Without education, in other words, one would not be able to achieve the Confucian ethical ideal. But the argument is also that cultural accomplishment alone is not enough. It is interesting to note that the Chinese word "Wen" also has the sense of what is ornamental, a kind of embellishment or flourish that contrasts with the substance of a thing. Now, take a look at this observation by Confucius. "If a person is strong in substance but lacking in cultural refinement, he will become boorish. If he is strong in cultural accomplishment but lacking in substance, he will become frivolous. Only when a person is finely balanced in culture and substance would he be able to become a Junzi." One could easily imagine that a person who studies widely might be lacking in principle or purpose. Or he might turn out to be a kind of shallow or superficial person who may be knowledgeable about a lot of things, but without substance, or more precisely, without moral substance. Li contributes to the formation of moral substance without which the journey to becoming a true Junzi gentleman cannot be completed. And of course, Li is never understood in isolation, but rather always in connection with Ren, Humanity, Yi, Rightness, and other virtues. Again, this does not deny the importance of culture and learning widely. The classics are very, very important, but they must be informed by Li and its attendant virtues. In the Analects, we have a recollection probably from one of the disciples, that Confucius focused on four areas in his teaching. They are culture, conduct, conscientiousness, and trustworthiness. Learning in the sense becomes in effect a form of ethical self-cultivation. In fact, Confucius laments at one point that scholars in earlier times, scholars of antiquity, studied for themselves, whereas in contrast, today's scholars study for others. That is to say, only to impress others or to advance their own interests, or both. What the scholars of antiquity actually did is not the issue here. The point is that genuine learning is here described not so much in terms of accumulation or mastery of information as a process of ethical self-cultivation. In modern terms, one may paraphrase by saying that education serves to expand one's consciousness, expand one's intellectual horizon, but it must not stop there. Increased awareness must lead to a deepened self-consciousness. Learning is not just about understanding things, but ultimately also about understanding ourselves. To say that a Junzi is a person of learning is not only to suggest that he is well-versed in the knowledge of culture, but more importantly, more fundamentally, that he is a morally significant person. Conversely, if someone is very knowledgeable about things but not morally cultivated, in the Confucian sense, he would not be qualified as a person of learning. At this point, before we end today, I would like to ask you to share your reflection on this question. Suppose you are choosing the leader of your community. How much weight would you put on the candidate's knowledge, for example, of foreign affairs or the economy? And how much weight would you put on his or her moral integrity? In your view, is the one more important than the other? Would you select a leader who is illiterate or uneducated, but who is perfectly upright and trustworthy?
