Puslapio vaizdai
PDF
„ePub“

Punishment and reward are oft repeated subjects; and the fear of the one, and the hope of enjoying the other, may be reasonably admitted to have some influence for good. But that neither of these motives of fear or hope is strong enough to effect a moral renovation, the condition of the Chinese as a people is pretty satisfactory proof. Threats of the direst calamities are laughed to scorn before a first rate opportunity of indulging in sin; and the most tempting offers of future reward become impalpable as smoke when some solid present profit can be made, even at the sacrifice of righteousness.

In regard to religion, the Chinese may be called either tolerant or latitudinarian, according to the tastes of their critics. They are certainly quite willing to allow the existence, side by side, of three different forms of religion, and that without any violent manifestation of a desire to persecute either the one or the other. Some few supercilious scholars may pretend to look down on Buddhism and Taoism; but their opposition ends there, and is not sincere even as far as it goes. I have known rigid Confucianists go through all the follies of the Buddhist or Taoist ritual on the occasion of a father's death. Fair and honest critics claim, and rightly so, for Confucianism the first rank among the religions or quasi-religions of the country; and there seems neither attempt nor disposition on anybody's part to call that in question. Let Confucianism be first, then let Buddhism and Taoism take their places. Such is the spirit of the present age as clearly reflected in these tracts. The Confucian religion instructs men by the Five Relations and the Five Constant Virtues. But, because in after ages, men's hearts grew more and more degenerate, Buddhism and Taoism introduced the doctrines of rewards and punishments, without question seeking to turn men's thoughts towards virtue. And from ancient to modern times these three correct religions have continued to exist.' 'Widely spread the Three Religions.' Men are equally exhorted to edit and publish with care the Confucian, Buddhist, and Taoist classics, and to circulate them widely wherever they can be read. Such actions are supposed to be highly meritorious, showing clearly to us that tract writing and circulation are things which the Chinese are predisposed to approve. But whilst the Chinese are tolerant of the Three Religions, they are not of any others. To come to the propagation of such religions as those of The White Lily, The Lord of Heaven (Roman Catholics), with others of various names, these are all depraved and false. They are altogether without divine doctrines, and their classics, charms, etc., are all a set of vile and deceitful productions.'

The objects of worship held up for veneration are many and various. The highest and most spiritual worship known to the com

[ocr errors]

mon people is that of Heaven and Earth. Exactly what is meant by this phrase 'Heaven and Earth' it is difficult to discover. The first sentence in the God of War's tract, is, 'Revere Heaven and Earth.' The comment asserts this to be a duty of paramount obligation. No definition of the terms is given, but the existence of the being or beings intended before all things is assumed. Heaven and Earth being in existence, then were all things born. Heaven and Earth gave birth to things. And of all things man is the most honourable.' Whatever the Chinese mean by this phrase, in connection with it they approach very nearly to a plain statement of the sublime doctrine of the Fatherhood of God. Heaven and Earth are one great parentage. And as there are no Earthly parents who do not love their children, so man is the beloved of Heaven. Such being the case Heaven and Earth are bound to nourish preserve, and bless mankind. If man shows sympathy for man, much more do Heaven and Earth. and Earth feel for man, but cannot excuse him.'

Heaven

In common conversation one often hears the word 'Heaven' alone, used apparently as the equivalent of 'Heaven and Earth,' but in these books I have not found it so. The term Lao Tien Yie, however, often occurs, and he is represented as actively engaged in the government and control of human affairs. And this is a name, which by a very common consent of missionary opinion, may well be used by Christians for the true God: indeed, if we may translate it into Venerable Heavenly Father, it seems to be a term of peculiar value. This Chinese recognition of Fatherhood in the person or persons forming their highest object or objects of worship is a grand fact; and yet it is not so very extraordinary in the case of a people who trace up the same relation from their actual parents to their magistrates, and from them up to the emperor himself—the father of his people.

Without further particularizing it will be sufficient to say that Buddha, Yuh-huang, and all the gods in the Chinese pantheon are represented as being worthy of, and demanding the worship of mankind. Worship the gods' is the second command in the important tract just quoted. The commentator says that by the gods,' are meant Buddhist and Taoist gods of all sorts, who inspect the good and evil happening amongst men, and to whom every one is bound to pay respectful service. The gods, like lightning, are vital every where, examining men's good and evil deeds with clearest discrmination. Reflect on this, and do not secretly violate conscience, for Heaven hears whispered words as the reverberations of thunder.'

[ocr errors]

From the worship of those supposed to be gods, we descend to that of sages and ancestors, who certainly are worshipped as though

they were gods. Not so much is said in these books on the worship of sages as one might expect to find; perhaps it is taken for granted, or rather perhaps it is left as a subject of special interest and importance to the literati, a class of persons for whom these tracts were not specially written. Still, men are here plainly enjoined to venerate these great men of antiquity, to whom we are indebted for the classics which teach the doctrines proper to man; and calumniation of the Sages is denounced as almost an unpardonable sin.

[ocr errors]

Ancestral worship is a subject closely connected with filial piety, and therefore might have been treated of under the relation of 'Father and Son;' but, since it is at this point that filial piety becomes religion, I have reserved the consideration of it for this place. It may be remarked, that equally in the Classics and in books written for the learned, and in the class of books and tracts under review, the worship of ancestors is taught and insisted upon as one of the first duties of men. Doubtless this is correctly supposed to be the centre and core, the very heart of Chinese religion. Venerate Ancestors. Men have ancestors just as streams have sources and trees have roots. The welfare and prosperity of a family altogether depend on the spiritual energy and protection of ancestors. At the four seasons, the eight terms, and on the anniversaries of their deaths, they must be sacrificed to with devout sincerity. Their graves must be yearly put into good repair, and at the same time worship offered to the deceased. Thus doing you will properly fulfil your duty, and escape the crime of forgetting your own origin. And, in the world of shades, your ancestors will be gratified, and will in consequence afford you their protection.' Lord Lytton would have admired the Chinese for this branch of their religion at least, for he says, "Beautiful was the Etruscan superstition, that the ancestors became the household gods.' The favourite illustration used in speaking of the relation between ancestors and descendants is that of a tree. Ancestors are the root; descendants are the branches, flowers and fruit. Of all men ancestors are those whom we are supremely obliged to venerate.' And, "though ancestors may have long ago left the earth, descendants must never forget their root and stock, but at all the stated periods honour them with the proper sacrifices.' Yet, notwithstanding the assumed abundant reasonableness of this ancestral worship, and its imperative obligation, the author of one of the best of these books complains bitterly of its neglect. Since ancestral worship and filial piety are one and the same virtue, how is it that there are those who know not their own root and stock; who, whilst their grand-parents are yet alive will not serve them respectfully, and when they are dead will neither bury

them decently, nor at the four seasons sacrifice to them, nor in the ancestral temple observe the proper ceremonies?' Other faults are complained of, and he indignantly concludes by asking, 'What think you will become of such descendants as these?' The loss of posterity is generally the chief punishment threatened; a punishment, it would seem, which must affect the ancestors themselves as much as those for whom it is intended.

With respect to the nature of divine worship, one is surprised to find any thing in these books so good as the following: "True worship of the gods does not consist in noise and outward observance, but in sincerity and truth.' 'Men ought always to be as careful and respectful in the presence of the images, as though they were actually in the presence of the very living gods themselves. The respect due to the gods does not solely consist in making the three kinds of meat offerings to them, or in employing actors to play before them.' Some kind of spirituality seems to be here implied-the very thing most conspicuously absent in the conduct and demeanour of persons actually engaged in worship. The use of images is justified by the effect they are supposed to produce on the consciences of beholders. 'Good men seeing the images pay to the gods themselves more abundant honour; and bad men seeing them are struck with terror.' This may be the correct theory of idol worshippers, but in practice it is found to fail. The images of the door gods fail to keep out thieves; and the images of the God of Wealth, found in almost every shop, fail to prevent the sale of adulterated articles, and the charging of fraudulent prices. They may have great power over men's consciences, but in real life, few are content to leave the custody of their wealth, goods, or home, to them; nay, a dog in a temple is often found more effectual in keeping away prowling thieves, than all the images of the gods it contains.

The theology or doctrine which one discovers in reading over these books is neither very systematic nor intelligble. The aim of the books is not to teach doctrine, but to inculcate virtue; and hence we find a great deal more about what men are to do, than what they are to believe.

Very little is said about the origin of things, or the creation of heaven and earth. But it is worth while remarking that the little which is said is in the right direction. Whilst the materialistic philosophers of China resolve spiritual beings into impalpable nature, or laws of nature, losing mind in matter, so making matter eternal, and the eternal cause of itself, the authors of these tracts plainly assert that all things had a beginning, and that all things were caused or born by Heaven and Earth. Heaven and Earth gave birth to things.'

'Heaven and Eurth combine their generative influences, and all things are born.'

[ocr errors]

Having thus briefly and dimly accounted for the existence of things in general, they proceed to account for the origin of man. And here again it is satisfactory to note that they do not trace his descent from any lower forms of animal life, but at once assert of the newly formed man that he is the 'Soul of Creation,' the most honourable thing or being created.' "He who formed things, in forming man gave him two hands, two ears, and two eyes, and but one tongue, thus signifying that he should see, hear and do a great deal, but should say little." With regard to the nature of the man so formed by Heaven, the teaching of these tracts is in harmony with that of the Classics; but they rather assume, and run on the lines of the orthodox doctrine, than state it in so many words. That man is by nature pure is accepted as an indisputable dogma, and all that is said agrees, or rather is intended to agree, with this assumption. Ability to manifest filial piety and perform virtuous deeds, is all to be attributed to the fact that Heaven has bestowed on man a pure nature.' 'His body is begotten by parents. First indeed he receives from Heaven and Earth the pure etherial vital energy; and his powers of speech and action after birth are all the results of this atom of etherial principle. So it is that he differs from plants and trees, from birds and beasts.' 'Man being endowed as the Soul of Nature and the Universe, ranks with the Three Powers and the Five Elements.' The first and second of the Three Powers being Heaven and Earth, it seems something like blasphemy to place man in the same category; but if it be so it is supported by the higher authority of the Classics, in which man is said to form a ternion with Heaven and Earth. And if it be blasphemy, it errs on the side of giving man a higher rank in the orders of being than he deserves, and not a lower.

Like other people these writers are puzzled with the mystery of suffering and the origin of evil. The benevolence of parental Heaven and Earth is fully acknowledged, but they find it difficult to account for "a God of love and of hell together." In spite of the benevolent purposes of Heaven, 'hunger and want are unavoidable, dangers and difficulties are unavoidable, and so are untimely deaths. Alas! there are also troubles of war, of pestilence, of famine, of flood; the blood of the slain flows in streams, and their corpses are piled upon heaps, while the living, in terror, fly hither and thither in vain for safety. Thousands and myriads of disasters, in all shapes, befal us. Alas! what sort of a heart is that of Heaven and Earth ?' It is worth remarking, to the credit of the Chinese moral philosopher, that in

« AnkstesnisTęsti »