Table of Contents Volume 8 (2000)
The Confucian Golden Rule is formulated in three of the Four Books, which Chu Hsi grouped together as primary texts of Confucianism. All of these three the Analects, the Great Learning and the Doctrine of the Mean attach great importance to the rule as the imperative of shu or consideration for others. It has been objected that the Golden Rule is not always applicable, because one's desires may be different from others', and because what one de facto desires does not necessarily coincide with what one should desire. Chu Hsi believed that he could refute both of the objections by his methodological argument based on the "Eight Steps" in the Great Learning. In his view the practice of the rule presupposes self-cultivation, which begins with the investigation of li or principle to the utmost. In the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries the authenticity of Chu Hsi's doctrines was questioned by the Japanese Confucianists who belonged to the "Ancient Learning" school. Yamaga Soko threw doubt on his methodology and emphasized the importance of li or rites as external factors. Ito Jinsai was bold enough to consider the Great Learning as well as Neo-Confucian philosophy as a whole to be a deviation from the authentic teachings of Confucius. Ogyu Sorai rehabilitated the authority of the Five (or Six) Classics and equated the Way of Confucius with the Way of the Early Kings embodied in them. Their critical arguments against Chu Hsi's intellectualism cut the logical connection between the investigation of li or principle to the utmost and the practice of the Golden Rule as the requirement of shu. It means that the rule was faced again with the old problem of discrepancy between what one de facto desires and what one should desire.