[MUSIC] Hi, in this video segment, we will focus on the relationship between Ren (humanity) and Li (proper conduct) in the person of the ideal Junzi. There are two main interpretations in this regard. The first is adjusted by Herbert Fingarette in his short, but influential book Confucius: The Secular as Sacred. We can break down the general argument into a number of steps. Adds to his efficaciousness, the idea of grace incidentally, interestingly, also has these different senses. As a favor or beneficence, and also in the sense of flawless performance. Three, Li requires the proper attitude, sincerity, and motivation that is not motivated by selfish concerns. Otherwise, the ritual action will degenerate simply into a kind of empty formalism. This proper motivation and attitude is precisely what the Analects called Ren. Four, Ren is therefore, acquired as one learns and perfects Li. As Fingarette puts it, they are but two sides of the same coin, but there is no indication that Ren involves the idea of an inner self. It is simply the proper attitude and motivation that we acquire as we are trained in the processes of Li. Therefore, in Analects 12.1, a passage that we have already looked at, the emphasis is on returning to Li. Five, the implication here is that the self begins more or less as a blank slate, besides the undeniable raw impulses, drives, and needs. Li then serves to restrain and shape these impulses. And in so doing, also instill a moral orientation, which Confucius generally describes as Ren. So what do you think? Does this agree with your own interpretation of the relationship between Ren and Li? Or do you think that Fingarette may be underestimating the inner dimension of Confucian ethics? The second interpretation, which was the majority view before Fingarette's novel suggestion sees Ren precisely as the fundamental inequality of the Junzi. Again, this does not necessarily entail a theory of human nature. Rather what this suggests is that Ren is a state of mind or a mode of being which must be cultivated and carefully developed. It can be described as love or benevolence, because Ren suggests genuine feeling and affection stemming directly from the heart. In this sense, Ren maybe likened to an active dynamic moral force that pervades the inner being of the ethically superior person and informs and directs all of his actions. However, Ren is not a vague sentimental feeling of just wanting to be nice. As an inequality, it is characterized by self-reflection, so that the individual must take charge to rectify mistakes and to cultivate goodness within him or herself. Moreover, Ren is always expressed outwardly in a concrete way. This outward expression is structured by Li. On this view, in this analysis, Ren is seen as more fundamental than Li, or as ethically prior to Li. Without Ren, Li would at best be a kind of mechanical, ritual action which cannot bring about the desired result of harmony and social well-being. Of course, in actual practice, one may certainly abuse the spirit of propriety, pretend to be sincere. So that Li precisely becomes a formalistic and ritualistic act, devoid or any real meaning. But in theory, this is overcome when Li is informed by Ren. In theory, Li would not be Li if Ren is absent. If it is not guided by the strong inner moral purpose, which characterizes the ideal Junzi. For this reason, the specific expression of Li may not be rigidly followed. So long as it conforms with Ren, so long as it is not an artificial or contrived expression, but a natural outflowing of the fully internalised sense of humanity, it's function will be fulfilled. In fact, according to this interpretation, it is simply not possible to be a person of Ren and yet acts contrary to Li. The attainment of Ren is invariably manifested in propriety. Absence of the one implies the absence of the other. Ren is both necessary and sufficient, according to this interpretation. In this sense, Ren is the ideal humanity to which all human beings should aspire and are capable of achieving. In this sense, the Junzi stands in stark contrast to what the Analects describes as a mean and petty person. The latter is precisely without humanity that characterizes an ethically fully formed human being. It is as if Confucius is saying that without Ren, one does not even deserve to be called a human being at all. The mean and petty person or morally inferior person maybe proficient in carrying out the ritual conduct of everyday life, and may even be very clever and very good at it. But he does not have the moral fibre, so to speak, that would elevate and transform everyday conduct to ethically significant action. So just to recap, there are at least two different views on the relationship between Ren and Li, between Humanity and Proper Conduct. One interpretation sees Li as essential and Ren is the spirit in which Li should be performing. The other interpretation however would see Ren as more basic as the inner moral core of an individual which ideally should permeate or actions. Before we continue, I would like to ask you to share your thoughts on the relationship between Ren and Li. Is one more important than the other? And how do they combine to form the foundation of an ethical vision? I'm more inclined to recognize a place for natural moral sentiments in Confucius thinking. That is the concept of Ren, seems to me, to speak to a certain humane feeling that motivate moral action. I would say more about this in the next video segment. But before we end, let me add that these two interpretations of Ren and Li do share certain common assumptions, despite their differences. For both interpretations, whether they see Ren as an inner moral self that intends, wills, directs, and judges all action. Or as the proper attitude that accompanies acts of Li, and which renders them truly morally significant, there is a strong practical emphasis. For one thing, this suggests that the superior Junzi cannot adopt the life of the recluse or hermit, because being Ren means to be involved in social relations. In the context of Confucius China, this involvement extends to the realm of politics. In traditional China, politics and ethics simply cannot be separated. And for the ruler, this means that benevolent government must be adopted. Again, this hugs back to the idea of Heaven's Mandate that we discussed previously. For individuals at large, to be on the side of humanity and rightness entails active participation in the political process. Not as a supporter of any one individual or party, but as a servant of humanity. There is clearly then a strong optimism in Confucian ethics and political philosophy, in that virtue is seen to have a tremendous transforming power. If those in positions of political authority are upright, it is assumed that the people will follow as a matter of course. The Analects states, "The virtue or moral character of the Junzi is like the wind. The character of a petty person in contrast is like the grass. When the wind blows over the grass, the latter is sure to bend." In modern terms, this presupposes that people will generally look up to role models, that acts of kindness will generate responses in kind. And therefore, be effective in building a sense of civic responsibility. The words meaning to govern and to be correct are actually pronounced in the same way in Chinese. And playing on these two words, Confucius said, "To 'govern' is to be 'correct.' If you, he is referring to someone in political leadership, if you set an example by being correct yourself, who will dare to be incorrect." Another implication that both interpretations of Ren and Li share, is that the Junzi ideal requires tremendous effort and discipline to achieve. Thus, as one of Confucius main disciples remarks, and this has become a proverbial expression in the Chinese language, "A publicly engaged scholar must be strong and resolute, for his burden is heavy and his journey or way is long." Here playing on the duo meaning of the term "Dao," as a path and also as an ethical concept. "He takes Ren as his burden. Is that not heavy," the passage continues. "Only with death does his journey come to an end. Is that not long?" Yet difficult as it may be, it is nonetheless possible and has been achieved in the past by the ancient sages. As if to reassure his followers, Confucius also says, is Ren really so far away? That is to say, is it really so difficult to achieve? If I desire to be Ren, I will find that it is already here! When we come back, I will introduce a new concept. The concept of "Rrightness" or "Yi," which I think will provide a fuller picture of the workings of Ren and Li, and therefore, the being of the ideal Junzi. Well, till then.
