Discourse on the Natural Theology of the Chinese 9780824886028

Citation preview

D i s c o u r s e on the N a t u r a l T h e o l o g y of the C h i n e s e

•' ,

\

( W i l i i 'chê^'eh

fH|. f S j k

.{it ¡wrv *»»/ t U t ^ f ^ r f w v ^ s f.,

prfr'tfti 1i4 ' W-" ••>'

:

~

y-df^ftr-iM >' «»re * ' ' S

T tC.^UUtiyiw'-' ^

il

b m É p ^ r * ' ~

H K

h^'-

^

L ,

u*

r

i r ' J W

vim

DISCOURSE ON THE NATURAL THEOLOGY OF THE CHINESE Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz

Translated, with an Introduction, Notes and Commentary by Henry Rosemont, Jr. and Daniel J. Cook

MONOGRAPH NO. 4 OF THE SOCIETY FOR ASIAN AND COMPARATIVE PHILOSOPHY 1977

©

by The University Press of Hawaii

1977

All rights reserved Manufactured in the United States of America

First p r i n t i n g , 19 7 7 Second p r i n t i n g , 198 0

Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Leibniz, Gottfried Wilhelm, Freiherr von, 1646-1716. Discourse on the natural theology of the Chinese. (Monograph of the Society for Asian and Comparative Philosophy ; 4) Translation of Lettre sur la philosophie chinoise Nicolas de Remond. Bibliography:

p.

Includes index. 1. II.

Philosophy, Chinese.

Cook, Daniel J.

I.

III. Title.

Rosemont, Henry, 1934IV.

for Asian and comparative Philosophy.

Series:

Monograph of the

Society for Asian and Comparative Philosophy ; 4. B2591. L47E5

1977

ISBN 0-8248-0542-9

181'.11

Society

77-2411

CONTENTS

P a g e 1, verso of the L e i b n i z a u t o g r a p h Acknowledgements

Frontispiece vii

Introduction I. B a c k g r o u n d of the D i s c o u r s e II. S o u r c e s of L e i b n i z ' s K n o w l e d g e of C h i n a III. T h e C h i n e s e I n t e l l e c t u a l T r a d i t i o n IV. O u t l i n e a n d S t r u c t u r e of the D i s c o u r s e V. T h e M a n u s c r i p t a n d Its T r a n s l a t i o n F o o t n o t e s to the I n t r o d u c t i o n D i s c o u r s e On T h e N a t u r a l T h e o l o g y of the C h i n e s e Appendix:

V a r i a n t R e a d i n g s of the T e x t

1 7 17 34 39 44 53 167

Bibliography

170

Index

175

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS T h e s e a c k n o w l e d g e m e n t s s t a n d as t e s t i m o n y to the range, depth, a n d q u a l i t y of L e i b n i z ' s m i n d :

even with a division

of t h e v a r i e d l a b o r s b e t w e e n us, m u c h a s s i s t a n c e w a s

needed

to c o m p l e t e and p r o d u c e this w o r k . O u r first debt is to L y n n e van V o o r h e e s of L e h m a n C o l lege, CUNY, w h o s e d e t a i l e d k n o w l e d g e of 1 7 t h C e n t u r y

French

s y n t a x a n d idiom r e d u c e d m a r k e d l y the n u m b e r of e r r o r s the first to later d r a f t s of the t r a n s l a t i o n ; w e are for her c l o s e a n d c a r e f u l r e a d i n g of the text.

from

grateful

John Tagli-

abue, of t h e M i t t e l a t e i n i s c h e s S e m i n a r , U n i v e r s i t y of Bonn, a s s i s t e d u s in t r a n s l a t i n g p a s s a g e s f r o m L a t i n , a n d p r o v i d e d s p e c i f i c c i t a t i o n s for several of the a l l u s i o n s L e i b n i z m a d e to v a r i o u s a s p e c t s of R o m a n law and r e l i g i o n . An early v e r s i o n of the m a n u s c r i p t w a s r e a d

by Eliot

D e u t s c h of the U n i v e r s i t y of H a w a i i , G e r a l d L a r s o n of the U n i v e r s i t y of C a l i f o r n i a - S a n t a B a r b a r a , a n d D a v i d M u n g e l l o of B r i a r c l i f f C o l l e g e , all of w h o m m a d e several h e l p f u l g e s t i o n s for i m p r o v i n g it. clarity and detail

sug-

T h e final v e r s i o n w a s given a d d e d

t h a n k s to a clear a n d d e t a i l e d

reading

by N a t h a n S i v i n of t h e M a s s a c h u s e t t s I n s t i t u t e of T e c h n o l o g y . W e are f u r t h e r g r a t e f u l to D a v i d M u n g e l l o for m a k i n g a v a i l a b l e to us the t y p e d d r a f t of his f o r t h c o m i n g and N e o - C o n f u c i a n i s m :

Leibniz

T h e S e a r c h for A c c o r d , to w h i c h w e

h a v e r e f e r r e d f r e q u e n t l y in the f o o t n o t e s .

Similarly,

we

have f r e q u e n t l y c i t e d the G e r m a n v e r s i o n of t h i s w o r k by R e n a t e L o o s e n a n d F r a n z V o n Essen, Zwei B r i e f e über B i n ä r e Z a h l e n s y s t e m u n d die C h i n e s i s c h e P h i l o s o p h i e ;

das differ-

e n c e s of t r a n s l a t i o n a n d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n n o t w i t h s t a n d i n g , have p r o f i t e d from the w o r k of our p r e d e c e s s o r s .

we

W e have

also p r o f i t e d from the w o r k of our c o n t e m p o r a r i e s :

Christopher

B e n o i t , A l a n B e r k o w i t z , a n d T h a t c h e r Deane, of the L e i b n i z B o u v e t C o r r e s p o n d e n c e P r o j e c t at the U n i v e r s i t y of V e r m o n t , k i n d l y m a d e a v a i l a b l e to us d r a f t s of their i m p o r t a n t w o r k , w h i c h w e hope is soon p u b l i s h e d . B e c a u s e the m o n o g r a p h s in t h i s s e r i e s are p r o d u c e d ly from a t y p e s c r i p t , a n d b e c a u s e t h i s p a r t i c u l a r

direct-

manuscript

r e q u i r e d several type faces, a p l a n n e d layout, a n d m a t e r i a l s in s e v e r a l languages, it w a s e s s e n t i a l that the final copy b e p r e p a r e d w i t h special care a n d skill.

W e are c o n f i d e n t

r e a d e r s w i l l a g r e e that the w o r k w a s done o u t s t a n d i n g l y

that well.

All of t h e c r e d i t g o e s to A n n a L a u r a R o s o w a n d S a l l y W a r r e n of the E a s t A s i a n R e s e a r c h C e n t e r at H a r v a r d U n i v e r s i t y , w h o ,

in

a d d i t i o n to their typing, p r o o f r e a d the m a n u s c r i p t in an u n commonly competent manner.

M a t c h i n g the t y p e s c r i p t in its

a e s t h e t i c q u a l i t i e s is the C h i n e s e c a l l i g r a p h y , are i n d e b t e d to D i a n a W a n g of the K o r e a n S t u d i e s at H a r v a r d .

for w h i c h w e Department

K a t h e r i n e B r u n e r , formerly w i t h the H a r v a r d U n i -

v e r s i t y P r e s s , k i n d l y u n d e r t o o k the d i f f i c u l t task of p r e p a r i n g the

index.

O u r final debt, is to A l b e r t H e i n e k a m p and h i s at the G. W. L e i b n i z G e s e l l s c h a f t

in H a n o v e r , W e s t

w h o s u p p l i e d us, from the N i e d e r s & c h s i c h e

associates Germany,

Landesbibliothek,

w i t h a p h o t o g r a p h i c copy of L e i b n i z ' s a u t o g r a p h of the D i s c o u r s e on the N a t u r a l T h e o l o g y of the C h i n e s e , a n d w i t h other m a t e r i a l s r e l e v a n t to this

translation.

To all of these p e o p l e w e are d e e p l y

grateful.

Lexington,

Massachusetts

H. R.

September,

1976

D. J. C.

D i s c o u r s e on the N a t u r a l T h e o l o g y of the C h i n e s e

INTRODUCTION

I.

B a c k g r o u n d of the D i s c o u r s e If E r a s m u s of R o t t e r d a m w a s the " U n i v e r s a l M a n " of the

late 1 5 t h a n d early 16th c e n t u r i e s , G o t t f r i e d W i l h e l m

Leibniz

w a s a m a j o r c a n d i d a t e for the title two h u n d r e d y e a r s

later.

H e not o n l y s t u d i e d , b u t w r o t e o r i g i n a l w o r k s o n s u b j e c t s as d i s t i n c t as g e o m e t r y a n d b i o l o g y , g e o l o g y a n d t h e o l o g y , m e t a p h y s i c s a n d s t a t i s t i c s ; his d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n w a s j u r i s p r u d e n c e ; he w a s o n e of the f o r e m o s t

and

topic

mathematicians

of h i s time, a n d a famous p h i l o s o p h e r w h o s e fame has

endured;

a n d h e w a s all of t h e s e w h i l e e n g a g e d in a long a n d a c t i v e public

career.

It is w e l l k n o w n t h a t C h i n a w a s a m o n g h i s m a n y

interests.

H e s t u d i e d C h i n e s e c i v i l i z a t i o n t h r o u g h o u t his adult life,

and

from the late 1 6 8 0 ' s u n t i l his d e a t h in 1716 h i s s t u d i e s w e r e fairly d e t a i l e d , not m e r e l y e x o t i c d i v e r s i o n s .

A

significant

amount of his c o r r e s p o n d e n c e w a s d e v o t e d to C h i n a , a n d several of h i s c o r r e s p o n d e n t s w e r e a m o n g the m o s t k n o w l e d g e a b l e p e a n s of his day on the s u b j e c t of C h i n e s e a f f a i r s . the r e l a t i v e l y few of his w r i t i n g s on any subject

Euro-

O n e of

published

d u r i n g h i s l i f e t i m e w a s his " P r e f a c e " to the N o v i s s i m a

Sinica I

(Recent N e w s f r o m C h i n a ) , i s s u e d in 1697 a n d a g a i n in 1699.

2

A part of his interest was ecumenical; he wanted to bring together the several European countries into one Christian body, and he believed the goal would be realized sooner, and be more enduring, by including other major civilizations such as Russia and China in the expanded human community.

But China

was not only a means to an end for Leibniz, for he had a high regard for Chinese accomplishments in and of themselves, sufficient to think that China had much to teach Europe. "Preface" he wrote:

In his

2

[I]f we are their equals in the industrial arts, and ahead of them in contemplative sciences, certainly they surpass us (though it is almost shameful to admit this) in practical philosophy, that is, in the precepts of ethics and politics adapted to the present life and use of mortals. From the "Preface" alone, however, we will not learn about Leibniz's ideas on Chinese philosophy and religion in detail, because the bulk of the Novissima Sinica is more a catalog of current events dealing with China and the opening of trade routes than it is a serious sinological treatise. Further, although Leibniz regularly discussed Chinese thought in his correspondence, the discussions were usually only a few paragraphs in length.

Not until the last year of his life did

he set down his views on Chinese thought systematically, in a long letter written to one of his later correspondents, Nicholas de Remond, a French Platonist and the head of the Councils of the Duke of Orleans.

In correspondence written

the year before, Remond sent Leibniz two works on Chinese

3

religion written by Catholic missionaries, and asked the philo3

sopher's opinion of them. translated herein.

Leibniz's reply is the document

It is usually referred to as the "Letter

on Chinese Philosophy"; Leibniz himself, however, referred to the text as a "Discours sur la

Theologie naturelle >> des

Chinois," which provided the title of this edition. Even by Leibnizian standards (and he was a prolific correspondent), the reply is a long one:

over 14,000 words.

The main topics discussed are the Chinese conception of God, universal principles, spiritual substance(s), souls, immortality, and the correlations between Leibniz's binary mathematical notation and the I Ching, China's oldest book of divination.

In these contexts he also discusses his own famous

views of pre-established harmony, entelechies, primary and secondary matter, and God.

Further, he both states and shows

what he considers to be the proper method of philosophical argumentation and demonstration in the Discourse, and, along the way, makes repeated references to Greek philosophy, the early Church fathers, and to history, both Western and Chinese. The length and sophisticated content of the Discourse thus make it a significant element of Leibniz's corpus, especially when it is remembered that he wrote it in his 70th year; it must be taken as a statement of the mature and considered reflections of the author. It may therefore seem unusual that the text was not translated for two and a half centuries.

A German edition did not

4

appear until 1966, and the present work marks its first presentation in English.

Part of the reason for this neglect

must lie in the fact that the Discourse was written in French, which has remained a fairly common research language for scholars.

Moreover, the text is by no means unique in being un-

translated; many of Leibniz's works remain available only in the French, Latin or German in which they were originally written. But there are more substantive reasons for the neglect of this document.

First, while Leibniz had many insights into,

and understanding of, the history and nature of Chinese thought, the Discourse should not be the only work read on the subject.

By the end of his life Leibniz was probably as well

versed on China as any of his contemporaries who had not actually been there; nevertheless, the Discourse contains mistakes, ranging from chronology, to authorship, to the meanings of key Chinese philosophical and religious terms and ideas. Most of these mistakes, of course, were not original with Leibniz (he knew some characters, but could not read classical Chinese); rather did they come from the missionary writings which formed the basis of much that he learned about China, especially Chinese thought.

These missionaries were the

ground-breakers of sinological studies in the West, guaranteeing that they would make mistakes even without the handicap of bringing a strong Christian perspective to bear on the non-Christian culture they were studying.

If those mistakes

5

are now seen easily, the ease is due in no small measure to the growth of scholarship that followed the early missionary cultivation of the field. Still another reason for neglecting the Discourse might lie in the difficulties it presents to translators.

In the

first place, Leibniz refers often and at length to the missionary writings, making it necessary to devote almost as much time and energy to the latter as to the Discourse itself. Cross-reading of this kind is particularly important for ascertaining the references to Chinese texts and authors, and for determining responsibility for misspelled or mistranslated Chinese terms, wrong dates, or clearly inadequate interpretations.

Second, Leibniz wrote at times in non-standard

French, occasionally with archaisms and often with unusual sentence constructions; while he wrote in a legible hand, he made deletions and additions at the top of pages, at the bottom, along the sides, and anywhere else he could squeeze in a 6

needed word or two.

Third, the transcription of Chinese terms

by Leibniz (and by the missionaries) is an orthographer's nightmare.

The original Chinese characters are not given in

the works consulted by Leibniz, and the missionaries were not consistent in their systems of transliteration.

Further, the

context of a passage usually does not make obvious which Chinese terms are being transliterated, so that the various Roman alphabetic spellings necessitate guesswork at times. An illustration of these difficulties is seen in the Discourse

6

when Leibniz refers to a "Vuen-Wang" on one occasion, to a 7

"Vuen Vuang" on another, and to a "Ven Vam" on still another. In transliterating from Chinese into an alphabetic language consistency and precision in the use of letters and marks is essential, but all three quoted terms refer to the same person, King Wen, founder of the Chou Dynasty (1122-256 B.C.). There is yet another reason, perhaps the most important, why the Discourse ars:

has not received more attention from schol-

the vision of Leibniz for a close understanding and com-

munication between China and the West has not yet come to pass. The growth of knowledge of Chinese culture in Europe and the U.S. has not been matched by a similar growth in its dissemination, especially at the public level; and the respectability of narrow specialization in the academic disciplines provides a ready-made excuse for all but China scholars to professionally ignore the world's oldest continuous culture, by one quarter of the human race.

inherited

Nowhere else is this more

true than in academic philosophy, where interest in the present document should be the greatest.

If Leibniz's writings on

logic, philosophy of science, and epistemology have been published in several editions, with many articles and commentaries on them, the attention reflects the concern of contemporary philosophers with logic, philosophy of science, and epistemology.

If the philosophy

and

philosophical arguments of the

Discourse are virtually unknown, with little written about them, then that, too, reflects something; and the reflection

7

is not f l a t t e r i n g .

In t h i s light w e w o u l d do w e l l to h e e d

the p r o p h e t i c r e m a r k m a d e by L e i b n i z in a l e t t e r to P e t e r G r e a t in 1716.

If w e do not actively p r o m o t e

the

understanding,

e x c h a n g e a n d c o m m u n i c a t i o n b e t w e e n the C h i n e s e a n d o u r s e l v e s , s he said, It will follow t h a t w h e n the C h i n e s e w i l l h a v e learnt from u s w h a t they w i s h to k n o w they w i l l t h e n c l o s e their d o o r s to u s . The D i s c o u r s e o n the N a t u r a l T h e o l o g y of the C h i n e s e

should

thus b e r e a d by s e r i o u s s t u d e n t s of L e i b n i z , b e c a u s e of w h a t h e s a i d therein; a n d it d e s e r v e s a w i d e r a u d i e n c e as w e l l , b e c a u s e it r e p r e s e n t s the c u l m i n a t i o n of one g i f t e d m a n ' s e f f o r t s to k e e p a W e s t e r n foot in the d o o r , a n d to o p e n it w i d e r so that w e m i g h t all look in. II.

S o u r c e s of L e i b n i z ' s K n o w l e d g e of

China

A l m o s t totally ignorant of C h i n a for a t h o u s a n d y e a r s , E u r o p e b e g a n to r e c e i v e a t r i c k l e of i n f o r m a t i o n about

the

" M i d d l e K i n g d o m " a g a i n at the c l o s e of the 1 3 t h C e n t u r y ,

begin-

ning w i t h the p u b l i c a t i o n of the j o u r n a l s of M a r c o P o l o a n d his b r o t h e r s .

N e v e r t h e l e s s , k n o w l e d g e of C h i n a w a s still m i n i -

m a l in L e i b n i z ' s E u r o p e four c e n t u r i e s later; t h e r e w e r e t r a n s l a t i o n s of C h i n e s e texts, the l a n g u a g e w a s

few

considered

exotic, c o m m u n i c a t i o n s w e r e p o o r and i n f r e q u e n t , a n d m y t h s the c o u n t r y a n d its p e o p l e s a b o u n d e d .

about

F o r h i s i n f o r m a t i o n on

C h i n a L e i b n i z w a s t h u s o b l i g e d to rely h e a v i l y o n C a t h o l i c

7

is not f l a t t e r i n g .

In t h i s light w e w o u l d do w e l l to h e e d

the p r o p h e t i c r e m a r k m a d e by L e i b n i z in a l e t t e r to P e t e r G r e a t in 1716.

If w e do not actively p r o m o t e

the

understanding,

e x c h a n g e a n d c o m m u n i c a t i o n b e t w e e n the C h i n e s e a n d o u r s e l v e s , s he said, It will follow t h a t w h e n the C h i n e s e w i l l h a v e learnt from u s w h a t they w i s h to k n o w they w i l l t h e n c l o s e their d o o r s to u s . The D i s c o u r s e o n the N a t u r a l T h e o l o g y of the C h i n e s e

should

thus b e r e a d by s e r i o u s s t u d e n t s of L e i b n i z , b e c a u s e of w h a t h e s a i d therein; a n d it d e s e r v e s a w i d e r a u d i e n c e as w e l l , b e c a u s e it r e p r e s e n t s the c u l m i n a t i o n of one g i f t e d m a n ' s e f f o r t s to k e e p a W e s t e r n foot in the d o o r , a n d to o p e n it w i d e r so that w e m i g h t all look in. II.

S o u r c e s of L e i b n i z ' s K n o w l e d g e of

China

A l m o s t totally ignorant of C h i n a for a t h o u s a n d y e a r s , E u r o p e b e g a n to r e c e i v e a t r i c k l e of i n f o r m a t i o n about

the

" M i d d l e K i n g d o m " a g a i n at the c l o s e of the 1 3 t h C e n t u r y ,

begin-

ning w i t h the p u b l i c a t i o n of the j o u r n a l s of M a r c o P o l o a n d his b r o t h e r s .

N e v e r t h e l e s s , k n o w l e d g e of C h i n a w a s still m i n i -

m a l in L e i b n i z ' s E u r o p e four c e n t u r i e s later; t h e r e w e r e t r a n s l a t i o n s of C h i n e s e texts, the l a n g u a g e w a s

few

considered

exotic, c o m m u n i c a t i o n s w e r e p o o r and i n f r e q u e n t , a n d m y t h s the c o u n t r y a n d its p e o p l e s a b o u n d e d .

about

F o r h i s i n f o r m a t i o n on

C h i n a L e i b n i z w a s t h u s o b l i g e d to rely h e a v i l y o n C a t h o l i c

8

m i s s i o n a r i e s , w h o had b e e n p r o s e l y t i z i n g in the country

for

a little o v e r a h u n d r e d y e a r s . The five m e n m o s t r e s p o n s i b l e for L e i b n i z ' s v i e w s o n China were Claudio Grimaldi 1610), N i c h o l a s L o n g o b a r d i

(1638-1712), Matteo Ricci

(1552-

(1565-1655), A n t o i n e d e S a i n t e -

M a r i e (1602-1669), and J o a c h i m B o u v e t

(1656-1730).

Four were

J e s u i t s , the f i f t h (Ste. M a r i e ) a F r a n c i s c a n ; all of t h e m h a d spent c o n s i d e r a b l e t i m e in China, k n e w the l a n g u a g e ( s ) a n d c o n s e q u e n t l y w e r e as w e l l a c q u a i n t e d w i t h a l m o s t

well,

all

f a c e t s of C h i n e s e c i v i l i z a t i o n as any other E u r o p e a n s of

their

time. A l t h o u g h L e i b n i z h a d some f a m i l i a r i t y w i t h C h i n a early

in

9

his life,

his m a t u r e study of the c o u n t r y a n d its c u l t u r e c a n

b e m a r k e d as b e g i n n i n g in 1689, w h e n he m e t C l a u d i o in R o m e .

Grimaldi

G r i m a l d i w a s b o r n in N o r t h e r n Italy, a n d took

p r i e s t l y v o w s w h e n he w a s n i n e t e e n .

E n t e r i n g C h i n a as a m i s -

s i o n a r y in 1669, h e soon f o u n d h i s w a y to the c o u r t at P e k i n g , and, w i t h F e r d i n a n d V e r b i e s t S.J. ,(1623-1688), s e r v e d as a d i p l o m a t i c a i d e to the C h i n e s e e m p e r o r and b e c a m e a c t i v e in the J e s u i t m a t h e m a t i c a l a n d a s t r o n o m i c a l e n d e a v o r s at c o u r t . A f t e r s e v e n t e e n y e a r s t h e r e , G r i m a l d i r e t u r n e d to E u r o p e ,

and

m e t L e i b n i z at R o m e in 1689. F o l l o w i n g t h e i r first m e e t i n g , L e i b n i z a d d r e s s e d

thirty

q u e s t i o n s about C h i n a to G r i m a l d i in a letter w r i t t e n in July 10

of the same year.

The q u e s t i o n s r a n g e d from the

a r t s to b o t a n y , from c h e m i s t r y to m i l i t a r y w e a p o n s ;

industrial they

9

reflect Leibniz's encyclopaedic mind, but also show that at the time of writing he was not well versed in Chinese geography, history or culture.

Even at this early stage of his sinologi-

cal development, however, Leibniz displayed the concerns that motivated his later studies, concerns which he makes explicit in the "Preface" to the Novissima Sinica and in the Discourse: the importance of learning about China for Europe's benefit, and the desire to increase Chinese receptivity to European ideas and artifacts —

both concerns having as their goal a

closer cooperation, understanding and intercourse between the two civilizations. In answering Leibniz's questions some extent —

not entirely accurately —

Grimaldi disparaged to Chinese astronomical

abilities, which probably formed the basis of the philosopher's fairly low opinion of the current state of natural science in 11 China.

Leibniz had a high regard for Grimaldi; partly because

of the latter's scientific skills, and partly because of Grimaldi 's close association with Verbiest.

The latter was also

a competent scientist, but more important for Leibniz's political concerns, was also influential at the court in Peking. For these reasons, Leibniz and Grimaldi remained in correspondence for several years after Leibniz returned to Hanover, and both Grimaldi and Verbiest contributed to the Novissima Sinica.

Grimaldi's influence on the philosopher was not,

however, confined to describing Chinese flora and fauna; the missionary also held definite views about Chinese philosophy

10

and religion, views first put forth by the most famous missionary to China of the 16th and 17th centuries:

Matteo Ricci.

The first Catholic mission in China was started by Ricci shortly after he arrived in the country from Macao in 1583. He remained in China until his death in 1610, and very few missionaries before or since have learned as much about the 12

culture of the peoples whose conversion they sought.

Ricci's

command of spoken Chinese was excellent, matched only by his skill in writing the difficult classical language.

He wrote

literary essays which, from the standpoints of classical learning, stylistic elegance and historical scholarship, were virtually indistinguishable from the essays written by the most prominent Chinese scholars and officials of his day. Ricci's journals were published posthumously in 1620 under the title On the Propagation of Christianity Among the Chinese, with editions in Latin, Italian, German, French and Spanish. The journals show Ricci's significant understanding (and appreciation) of Chinese customs, rituals and traditions, and argue for the compatibility of these elements of Chinese civilization with the basic beliefs and practices of Christianity. He excoriated popular Buddhism and Taoism, but cultivated the literati (Confucians) that he met, whom he believed to be convertible to the true faith because he also believed the classical texts which they revered could be shown to express ideas consonant with Christian doctrine. saw —

More pointedly, Ricci

and the later history of missionary activity in China

11

showed the clarity of his vision —

that those classical texts

were a basic ingredient of a three millenia old cultural tradition, which was not about to be abandoned by intelligent Chinese just because it was denounced by Christians, no matter how scientifically knowledgeable, or courageous, or pious those Christians might be.

As a consequence, Ricci advocated

what came to be known as the "accommodationist" position with respect to the conversion of the Chinese:

tolerance for their

ancient writings, their ritual observances and practice of ancestor worship, incorporating all of these into the Christian faith in China. Although Ricci died before Leibniz was born, the latter's admiration for the scholarly Jesuit is clear in the Discourse, and it is Ricci' s accommodationist position that Leibniz defends and advances therein.

Opposed to this position was Father

Nicholas Longobardi, who succeeded Ricci as the head of the China Mission.

Longobardi believed that the ancient Chinese

were materialists, and the moderns atheists; so that conversion to Christianity required the renunciation of traditional Chinese beliefs (largely Confucian).

Unlike his predecessor,

Longobardi did not cultivate the Chinese literati to any great extent.

He believed that the basic tenets of Confucianism,

to which all educated Chinese paid at least minimal homage, were flatly incompatible with Christian doctrine, and he set down his views in De Confucio E.jusque Doctrina Tractatus (here13

after cited as the Religion Treatise).

This work was

12

p r o b a b l y w r i t t e n about 1600, but not p u b l i s h e d u n t i l after

the

d e a t h of Ricci, a n d it w a s not t r a n s l a t e d into F r e n c h u n t i l 1701, w e l l after L o n g o b a r d i ' s d e a t h . were influential

T h e v i e w s e x p r e s s e d in it

in u n d e r c u t t i n g R i c c i ' s s y m p a t h e t i c a p p r o a c h to

Chinese conversion.

T h e R e l i g i o n T r e a t i s e is o n e of the two

w o r k s sent to L e i b n i z by R e m o n d , a n d L e i b n i z ' s c r i t i c i s m s of L o n g o b a r d i ' s v i e w s are a m a j o r c o m p o n e n t of the D i s c o u r s e . A l t h o u g h L o n g o b a r d i w a s o n e of the few J e s u i t s w h o g r e e d w i t h R i c c i , m o s t of the m i s s i o n a r i e s of o t h e r

disa-

orders

a t t a c k e d t h e a c c o m m o d a t i o n i s t p o s i t i o n , for p o l i t i c a l if not theological reasons.

P r o m i n e n t among them w a s the S p a n i s h

A n t o n i o C a b a l l e r o , k n o w n also as A n t o n i o C a b a l l e r o a S a n t a M a r i a , or, as L e i b n i z r e f e r r e d to him, A n t o i n e de S a i n t e m Marie.

T h i s F r a n c i s c a n , b o r n in 1602, first w e n t to C h i n a

f r o m the S p a n i s h m i s s i o n in M a n i l a in 1633, a n d left y e a r s later to take the a n t i - R i c c i p o s i t i o n to R o m e .

three He re-

t u r n e d in 1649, a n d r e m a i n e d in C h i n a until he d i e d in C a n t o n in 1669.

S h o r t l y b e f o r e his d e a t h S a i n t e - M a r i e w r o t e about

the C h i n e s e M i s s i o n , b u t the S p a n i s h m a n u s c r i p t now a p p e a r s to b e lost.

T h e F r e n c h t r a n s l a t i o n of the text w a s

entitled

T r a i t e sur q u e l q u e s p o i n t s i m p o r t a n t s de la M i s s i o n de la Chine (hereafter the Mission Treatise).

P u b l i s h e d in 1701,

it w a s the o t h e r text a p p a r e n t l y sent to L e i b n i z by R e m o n d . Like Longobardi, Sainte-Marie believed the

ancient

C h i n e s e to b e m a t e r i a l i s t i c (and s u p e r s t i t i o u s ) , a n d their s u c c e s s o r s d e v o i d of s p i r i t u a l views; t h e r e f o r e he, too,

for

13

advocated the need for total renunciation of China's tradition as a necessary condition for Christian conversion.

Thus,

Leibniz is no less critical of Sainte-Marie than Longobardi in the Discourse, and directs many of his arguments specifically to the Franciscan. The position of Ricci with respect to converting the Chinese came to be the dominant one among the Jesuits, but it did not prevail in Rome.

Opposition to this position was

voiced by a few Jesuits, and by many Franciscans and Dominicans.

The arguments lasted almost 150 years, and the "Rites

Controversy," as it was called, was settled once and for all against the Jesuits by Benedict XIV's Ex quo singulari of 1742. The anti-Jesuit forces "won" the Rites Controversy, but "lost" the conversion of the Chinese; how much the loss was to be felt outside the Vatican will probably never be known.

Had he

lived that long, Leibniz would have been bitterly disappointed at the papal dec ision; in a letter written in 1710 he said? "In the Chinese controversy which is raging at Rome today, I 15

favor the Jesuits and have for a long time.

..."

The last of the five missionaries who exerted a strong influence on Leibniz's views of China was Joachim Bouvet, one of the first French Jesuits to go there.

Like Verbiest, Bouvet

had access to the throne, and was a tutor of the K'ang-hsi Emperor's children.

He entered China in 1688 and remained

there for nine years, returning to Europe in 1697 to raise support (money and more missionaries) for the China Mission.

14

H e h a d r e a d the first e d i t i o n of N o v i s s i m a S i n i c a , a n d s e n t L e i b n i z a copy of his r e c e n t l y p u b l i s h e d " H i s t o r i c a l of the E m p e r o r of C h i n a . "

L e i b n i z p u b l i s h e d the

Portrait

"Portrait"

in the s e c o n d e d i t i o n of N o v i s s i m a Sinica, a n d the

correspon-

d e n c e b e t w e e n the two c o n t i n u e d for a w h i l e after B o u v e t t u r n e d to C h i n a in 1698.

re-

T h e m o s t s i g n i f i c a n t e x c h a n g e s of

l e t t e r s took p l a c e from 1700 to 1703, after w h i c h B o u v e t s t o p p e d w r i t i n g , p r o b a b l y d u e to t h e p r e s s u r e s of h i s w o r k in Peking.

L e i b n i z ' s last six l e t t e r s to B o u v e t w e n t

unanswered,

w h i c h m u s t h a v e t r o u b l e d the p h i l o s o p h e r b e c a u s e of the

intel16

lectual e x c i t e m e n t g e n e r a t e d by their e a r l i e r

correspondence.

B o u v e t t h o u g h t o n a g r a n d scale, m u c h m o r e a p h i l o s o p h e r than philologist.

He conveyed

many original

(and s o m e t i m e s

f a r - f e t c h e d ) ideas a b o u t C h i n e s e h i s t o r y , l a n g u a g e , a n d r e l i -

17

g i o n to L e i b n i z , t h r e e of w h i c h are r e f l e c t e d in the D i s c o u r s e . F i r s t , B o u v e t b e l i e v e d that the l e g e n d a r y e a r l y ruler F u H s i ("Fohi" in the text) h a d p r o d u c e d a n o t a t i o n for

describing

all of s c i e n c e , a n o t a t i o n e x e m p l i f i e d in the b a s i c le of t h e

I Ching

(see p. 20).

trigrams

T h e s e t r i g r a m s are m a d e u p of

c o m b i n a t i o n s of s o l i d a n d b r o k e n lines, b u t their

scientific

a n d m a t h e m a t i c a l s i g n i f i c a n c e w a s , a c c o r d i n g to B o u v e t ,

lost

o n later C h i n e s e , w h o simply saw the t r i g r a m s a n d their

exten-

sions, h e x a g r a m s , as p a r t of a s y s t e m of d i v i n a t i o n . a f t e r l e a r n i n g of L e i b n i z ' s w o r k in b i n a r y a r i t h m e t i c ,

Second, Bouvet

w a s able to t r a n s l a t e the n o t a t i o n of L e i b n i z into the t r i g r a m s , as p r o o f of his first c l a i m .

Leibniz's excitement

at

15

B o u v e t 1 s letter d e s c r i b i n g the p a r a l l e l s c a n easily b e

ima-

gined, for the p h i l o s o p h e r h e l d firmly t h r o u g h o u t his life the b e l i e f that r e a s o n w a s a l l - p e r s u a s i v e , a n d if u s e d b y

every-

one, w o u l d e v e n t u a l l y b r i n g e v e r y o n e to t h e t r u e faith, Christianity.

i.e.,

By t h i n k i n g t h a t the C h i n e s e of 4 5 0 0 y e a r s ago

p o s s e s s e d a m a t h e m a t i c a l n o t a t i o n s i m i l a r to his o w n —

which

w a s u s e f u l for the e x e m p l i f i c a t i o n of t h e p r i n c i p l e s of r e a s o n —

L e i b n i z not only f o u n d s u p p o r t for his a r g u m e n t s t h a t the

ancient C h i n e s e h a d n a t u r a l r e l i g i o n , b u t h e w a s a l s o a b l e to b e l i e v e , t h a n k s to h i s f a i t h in r e a s o n , that the c o n v e r s i o n of the C h i n e s e w o u l d p r o c e e d a p a c e o n c e it w a s d e m o n s t r a t e d to them that later g e n e r a t i o n s h a d s i m p l y lost the t r u e p r i n c i p l e s 19

set d o w n by F u Hsi. T h e last m a j o r i d e a of B o u v e t ' s w h i c h is r e f l e c t e d in the D i s c o u r s e is m o r e f a n c i f u l .

B o u v e t b e l i e v e d that F u H s i w a s

not C h i n e s e , b u t a m a n i f e s t a t i o n of the " L a w g i v e r , " a k i n to H e r m e s T r i s m e g i s t u s in the W e s t ; indeed, o n the b a s i s of s o m e q u e s t i o n a b l e e t y m o l o g i e s a n d a r g u m e n t s B o u v e t e v e n t r i e s to show that F u H s i a n d H e r m e s T r i s m e g i s t u s w e r e o n e a n d the 20

same.

F u r t h e r , a c c o r d i n g to t h e F r e n c h Jesuit, the ancient

form of the C h i n e s e l a n g u a g e shows a r e l a t i o n s h i p to H e b r e w , a n d to the h i e r o g l y p h s of the E g y p t i a n s .

ancient

Bouvet

p r o m i s e s to d o c u m e n t t h e s e s p e c u l a t i v e c l a i m s in later but the d o c u m e n t s are n o t f o r t h c o m i n g ; the from B o u v e t ' s e n d s t o p p e d at this p o i n t .

letters,

correspondence Yet despite what

m u s t h a v e b e e n k e e n d i s a p p o i n t m e n t at h a v i n g h i s later

letters

16

go unanswered Leibniz gave credence not only to Bouvet's views on the trigraras of the I Ching and binary arithmetic, but to the Jesuit's views on the ethnicity of Fu Hsi as well; although Bouvet's influence is seen most clearly in Part IV of the Discourse, there are suggestions in the earlier sections of the text that the founders of Western civilization (i.e., the "Patriarchs") passed on their traditions to the Chinese in 21

the dim past. Leibniz's mature knowledge of China thus came primarily from men who saw the country, its peoples and its culture through the filter of their own culture, a situation that was exacerbated by their avowed purpose in going to China: gain converts from the former to the latter.

to

But their biases

notwithstanding, these men learned much of China, and the three who advocated moderation and accommodation — maldi and Bouvet —

Ricci, Gri-

came not only to have an appreciation of

the Chinese heritage that was uncommon among Europeans, but to transmit that appreciation to Leibniz as well.

As a conse-

quence, Leibniz was opposed to the position of Longobardi and Sainte-Marie, whose acquaintance with Chinese philosophy and religion was not matched by any enthusiasm for it, and who therefore argued that the Christian faith must supplant, and not supplement, indigenous Chinese beliefs and practices. Believing that this position was fundamentally mistaken, Leibniz wrote the Discourse as a rebuttal to the historical and theological arguments put forth by the two missionaries in their treatises.

17

T h e r e b u t t a l r e s t s largely o n L e i b n i z ' s o w n

philosophi-

cal ideas, and h i s o w n v i e w of C h i n e s e i n t e l l e c t u a l

history,

w h i c h c a u s e d h i m to d i s t i n g u i s h sharply among a n d b e t w e e n the ideas of the a n c i e n t C h i n e s e , a n d the C h i n e s e e n c o u n t e r e d by the m i s s i o n a r i e s .

In o r d e r to p l a c e the m a n i f o l d

temporal

r e f e r e n c e s in the D i s c o u r s e in their p r o p e r c o n t e x t it is n e c e s s a r y to o u t l i n e the o r d e r of d e v e l o p m e n t of thought, and Leibniz's views Ill. T h e C h i n e s e I n t e l l e c t u a l

Chinese

thereof. Tradition

F o r p u r p o s e s of u n d e r s t a n d i n g the a r g u m e n t s in the D i s c o u r s e , the h i s t o r y —

real a n d l e g e n d a r y —

of C h i n e s e

thought

m u s t b e d i v i d e d into t h r e e d i s c o n t i n u o u s ages: 1) the e r a of the s a g e kings, from the 2 9 t h t h r o u g h the 1 2 t h c e n t u r i e s , B.C.; 2) the p e r i o d of C o n f u c i u s a n d h i s c l a s s i c a l

successors,

from the 6 t h t h r o u g h the 3 r d c e n t u r i e s B . C . ; a n d 3) the " m o d e r n " p e r i o d of N e o - C o n f u c i a n i s m , w i t h its c r i t i c i s m s of B u d d h i s m , b e g i n n i n g in the 11th C e n t u r y A.D. a n d c o n t i n u i n g

to

22

L e i b n i z ' s o w n day. The M e t h u s e l a h - l i k e r e i g n s a t t r i b u t e d to them

suggests

that the e a r l i e s t l e g e n d a r y r u l e r s of C h i n a w e r e just legendary.

T h e r e is no e v i d e n c e —

w r i t t e n m i l l e n i a later —

e x c e p t for the

that C h i n a w a s a m a j o r

that:

legends,

civilization

c i r c a 3000 B.C., t h e time p e r i o d in w h i c h L e i b n i z (via B o u v e t a n d o t h e r s ) p l a c e s F u H s i a n d t h e o l d e s t s t r a t a of the I C h i n g .

17

T h e r e b u t t a l r e s t s largely o n L e i b n i z ' s o w n

philosophi-

cal ideas, and h i s o w n v i e w of C h i n e s e i n t e l l e c t u a l

history,

w h i c h c a u s e d h i m to d i s t i n g u i s h sharply among a n d b e t w e e n the ideas of the a n c i e n t C h i n e s e , a n d the C h i n e s e e n c o u n t e r e d by the m i s s i o n a r i e s .

In o r d e r to p l a c e the m a n i f o l d

temporal

r e f e r e n c e s in the D i s c o u r s e in their p r o p e r c o n t e x t it is n e c e s s a r y to o u t l i n e the o r d e r of d e v e l o p m e n t of thought, and Leibniz's views Ill. T h e C h i n e s e I n t e l l e c t u a l

Chinese

thereof. Tradition

F o r p u r p o s e s of u n d e r s t a n d i n g the a r g u m e n t s in the D i s c o u r s e , the h i s t o r y —

real a n d l e g e n d a r y —

of C h i n e s e

thought

m u s t b e d i v i d e d into t h r e e d i s c o n t i n u o u s ages: 1) the e r a of the s a g e kings, from the 2 9 t h t h r o u g h the 1 2 t h c e n t u r i e s , B.C.; 2) the p e r i o d of C o n f u c i u s a n d h i s c l a s s i c a l

successors,

from the 6 t h t h r o u g h the 3 r d c e n t u r i e s B . C . ; a n d 3) the " m o d e r n " p e r i o d of N e o - C o n f u c i a n i s m , w i t h its c r i t i c i s m s of B u d d h i s m , b e g i n n i n g in the 11th C e n t u r y A.D. a n d c o n t i n u i n g

to

22

L e i b n i z ' s o w n day. The M e t h u s e l a h - l i k e r e i g n s a t t r i b u t e d to them

suggests

that the e a r l i e s t l e g e n d a r y r u l e r s of C h i n a w e r e just legendary.

T h e r e is no e v i d e n c e —

w r i t t e n m i l l e n i a later —

e x c e p t for the

that C h i n a w a s a m a j o r

that:

legends,

civilization

c i r c a 3000 B.C., t h e time p e r i o d in w h i c h L e i b n i z (via B o u v e t a n d o t h e r s ) p l a c e s F u H s i a n d t h e o l d e s t s t r a t a of the I C h i n g .

18

T h e e a r l i e s t date in C h i n e s e h i s t o r y c o n f i r m e d by

archae-

o l o g i c a l w o r k is the 1 5 t h C e n t u r y B . C . , the p e r i o d of the S h a n g D y n a s t y , w h o s e t r a d i t i o n a l dates are 1 7 6 6 - 1 1 2 2 B.C. facts r e c o v e r e d from S h a n g sites r e v e a l h i g h l y

The arti-

sophisticated

t e c h n o l o g i c a l a n d a r t i s t i c a b i l i t i e s in s u c h a r e a s as a r c h i t e c t u r e , b r o n z e - c a s t i n g a n d w r i t i n g , w h i c h s h o w that C h i n e s e c i v i l i z a t i o n , as a c i v i l i z a t i o n , m u s t go b a c k to at least

the

1 9 t h or 1 8 t h c e n t u r i e s B . C . ; but t h i s is s t i l l m o r e t h a n a 23

t h o u s a n d y e a r s later t h a n the d a t e s a c c e p t e d by

Leibniz.

M o r e o v e r , it b e a r s e m p h a s i z i n g that t h e r e are no C h i n e s e t e x t s w h i c h can b e s h o w n to b e e a r l i e r than a p p r o x i m a t e l y 11th Century B.C., and even these documents are

fragmentary

and/or contain m u c h material that was interpolated many t u r i e s later.

the

cen-

T h u s , a l t h o u g h the m i s s i o n a r i e s and L e i b n i z

r e f e r to t h e s a g e k i n g s as C h i n a ' s "most a n c i e n t

philosophers,"

t h e r e are not e v e n f r a g m e n t s of p h i l o s o p h i c a l w r i t i n g s

that

c a n b e a t t r i b u t e d to them. In a t t e m p t i n g to u n d e r s t a n d L e i b n i z ' s v i e w s of C h i n a , h o w e v e r , t h e h i s t o r i c i t y of t h e l e g e n d a r y r u l e r s is p e r h a p s l e s s i m p o r t a n t t h a n t h e q u a l i t i e s the l e g e n d s a t t r i b u t e to them.

In a d d i t i o n to F u Hsi, L e i b n i z m e n t i o n s the

Y a o , Shun, a n d o t h e r s , w h o s h a r e s i m i l a r

emperors

characteristics.

F i r s t , they w e r e not s u p e r n a t u r a l l y endowed; they lived to Very r i p e o l d ages, b u t all e v e n t u a l l y died, a n d d u r i n g their

life-

t i m e s p e r f o r m e d no f e a t s that c o n t r a v e n e d the laws of p h y s i c s . S e c o n d , the sage k i n g s w e r e h i g h l y i n t e l l i g e n t , a n d they put

19

their intelligence to good use in the service of the Chinese people by their inventions and discoveries (medicine, agriculture, writing, etc.)-

An(

i third, the sage kings were moral

exemplars, endeavoring to rule by moral suasion rather than force.

From the Discourse it is apparent that Leibniz was

aware of these qualities, and he uses the morality and intelligence accorded them —

especially Fu Hsi —

in making his

case for the religiosity of the ancient Chinese.

Indeed, his

highest praise for Chinese thinkers is given to these men. After the period of the sage kings, the next significant time period referred to by Leibniz (not always clearly) begins many centuries later, with the birth of Confucius (551-479 B.C.). No philosophical works prior to his time (if, indeed, any were written)have survived, and there is little evidence that any were extant during his lifetime.

Works on other topics were

produced, however, and several of them have come down to the present:

books of poetry, governmental records, history,

rituals, divination, and so forth.

Some of these works re-

ceived special attention from Confucius and his followers, who read philosophical and religious themes into them.

These books

became classics (ching), and like the Iliad and Odyssey in Greece, were not only a basic part of, but came to define the later cultural tradition of the Chinese.

Three of these

classics are cited specifically by Leibniz in the Discourse, and thereby deserve specific mention.

20

(1)

The I Ching ( ^ flj? ), or Book of Changes/"

This book has several components, not all of which were written at the same time. nature:

The oldest strata are divinatory in

symbolic descriptions of the 64 hexagrams which com-

prise the basic text.

According to the I Ching, change takes

place in the universe because of the complementary interaction of two fundamental principles, the yin and the yang.

Yin

denotes passivity, receptivity, and descent, and represents the female principle, the earth, darkness, valleys, moon, etc. The yang principle is active and ascending, male, light, heaven, mountains and the sun.

In the I Ching the female principle

is symbolized by a broken line ( by a solid one (

), and the male principle

).

By means of a formulaic counting out of yarrow (milfoil) stalks a person consults the oracle, obtaining at the end of the count either a yin or a yang number, which is recorded as a broken or unbroken line.

The counting ritual is repeated

six times, until a hexagram (six lines) is obtained, and the several female and/or male lines which make up the hexagram represent, in symbolic form, the diviner's place in the universe at the time of consultation. The hexagrams probably

grew out of an earlier symbolic

tradition of trigrams (three lines), which represented familial, social and natural phenomena. lines
-c

(

Iro iro

31

often

translated as the Analects;

Leibniz

refers to it as the "Lung Iu," "Lun Iu" and the "Su Lum Iu."). The book is a collection of brief conversations between the Master and his disciples, but other parts of the work may have been written down a full century or so after Confucius died. Many other writings have been attributed to him, and he is supposed to have edited some of the classics; but it is now widely held (as it was not during Leibniz's day) that the only solid text for ascertaining the Master's views is the Lun YU. Most Western interpreters of Confucius, and not a few modern Chinese themselves, portray China's First Teacher as a thoroughgoing rationalist, agnostic in religious matters if not downright atheistic.

There is much textual evidence for

this view, some of which is not-too-enthusiastically cited by Leibniz in the Discourse.

Such a portrayal, however, can be

overdrawn; the "this-worldliness" of Confucius notwithstanding, there are also significant passages in the Lun YU which show that he was at least occasionally concerned with less rationalistically-oriented issues.

Thus, he is supposed to have

lamented that "Heaven had forsaken him" in one passage, believed that Heaven had given him a special mission in another, and in still others he was troubled by the fact that neither in his dreams nor his observations of natural phenomena had he been given a "sign" that he would be successful in his efforts. Such other-worldly concerns, however, are not the kind Leibniz sought in seeking comparisons with Christian doctrine.

32

27

Interpreters of Confucius may never agree on the extent to which he focused on the secular over the sacred, or the magical, but they all agree that he was neither a metaphysician nor a theologian.

The Lun YU discusses ethics, rituals, cus-

toms, socio-political issues, and aesthetics in some detail, but there are no discussions of first principles, God, primary or secondary matter, Reason, and so forth; there are no discussions, in other words, of the major issues Leibniz discusses in the Discourse.

It is for this reason

that Leibniz

refers somewhat less to Confucius himself than to his legendary predecessors, or later followers, the descriptions of whom can be

more easily read as having Christian and/or cosmolo-

gical implications, at least by stalwart readers. The most famous successor to Confucius was Mencius, who lived one hundred and fifty years later (ca. 372-289 B.C.). In the book

-5" that bears his name,

Mencius elaborated

the views of Confucius, and while he did discuss some of the concepts taken up by Leibniz, for the most part the "Second Sage" of Confucianism shared the non-metaphysical and nontheological perspective of his predecessor. Not until the Li Chi (

^

), or Records of Ritual,

do we find a Confucian text that begins to link ethics and socio-political thought with cosmological speculation (and even in this book the speculations are not lengthy).

The Li

Chi was probably made up in its present form during the 2nd Century B.C., and the 49 heterogeneous chapters which comprise

28

it treat topics ranging from the details of social etiquette to ontology.

The book is fundamentally concerned with cus-

toms, rituals, morals and manners; one can find in it the proper form of address to one's in-laws, sacrifices to be made by the emperor, detailed instructions for bathing one's parents, and so forth.

Some of the chapters, however, attempt to link

these ceremonial duties with the place of human beings in the universe, and two of these chapters were singled out centuries later as worthy of especial study:

the Ta Hstleh (

or Great Learning, and the Chung Yung (

J^

^

),

), or Doctrine

35

of the Mean.

The latter work is quoted several times by

Leibniz in the Discourse, as coming from Confucius; almost surely it was written by some disciples(s) of his disciples, but it is an authentic early Confucian work.

In any event,

these two short works, together with the Mencius and Lun YU, are the "Four Books" to which Leibniz also makes reference in his text.

Taken together, these four works can be read a

variety of ways, but their basic thrust is clear, and can be summarized succinctly by taking the lines from Pope:

"Presume

then not God to scan // the proper study of mankind is man." In summary, while classical Confucianism is correctly characterized as religious and philosophical, the religion is civil, and the philosophy ethical, aesthetic, and sociopolitical.

The very early ritual practices (of the Shang and

early Chou) inherited by Confucius and his followers were originally derived from supernatural beliefs, but

29

t h o s e b e l i e f s , w h i l e never r e p u d i a t e d , w e r e n e v e r t h e l e s s not w i d e l y d i s c u s s e d b y the e d u c a t e d d u r i n g the p e r i o d in w h i c h he lived.

No m a t t e r w h a t his o w n p e r s o n a l v i e w s w i t h r e s -

pect to t h e s u p e r n a t u r a l m a y h a v e been, C o n f u c i u s saw that t h o s e links w i t h the r i c h c u l t u r a l p a s t w e r e too important

to

be lost in a s e c u l a r age, a n d h e t h e r e f o r e d e v o t e d h i s e n e r gies, as d i d t h o s e w h o f o l l o w e d him, to p r e s e r v i n g those c u l tural links b y p l a c i n g them in a social a n d h u m a n i s t i c

con-

36

text.

W i t h their s t e a d y focus on t r a d i t i o n , c u s t o m s ,

ritu-

als, r i t e s a n d so on, the early C o n f u c i a n s l a i d c l a i m to b e i n g the g u a r d i a n s a n d t r a n s m i t t e r s of the C h i n e s e h e r i t a g e .

It

is for t h i s r e a s o n that ever s i n c e the c l a s s i c a l p e r i o d ,

re-

f e r r i n g to a p e r s o n as a C o n f u c i a n o f t e n m e a n t little m o r e than that h e w a s a typical m e m b e r of the

literati.

T h e t h i r d p e r i o d of C h i n e s e i n t e l l e c t u a l history cant for r e a d i n g the D i s c o u r s e b e g i n s o v e r a t h o u s a n d later.

signifiyears

After m a n y c e n t u r i e s of b e i n g e c l i p s e d by the B u d -

d h i s m i m p o r t e d from India, the C o n f u c i a n c l a s s i c a l texts u n d e r went t h o r o u g h r e - e x a m i n a t i o n in the light of the c h a n g e s

in

C h i n e s e thought b r o u g h t about by B u d d h i s t d o c t r i n e s , a n d by t h e c h a n g e s in p o l i t i c a l a n d c u l t u r a l p a t t e r n s that C h i n a ' s g r o w t h as an empire.

accompanied

T h i s r e - e x a m i n a t i o n m a r k e d the

b e g i n n i n g of the p e r i o d of N e o - C o n f u c i a n i s m ,

and m a n y of the

p h i l o s o p h e r s m e n t i o n e d by L e i b n i z in the D i s c o u r s e w e r e tive of the r e n e w a l of the c l a s s i c a l tradition: the C h ' e n g b r o t h e r s , a n d e s p e c i a l l y the

forma-

Chang Tsai,

encyclopaedic

30 37

Chu Hsi (1130-1200).

Taking some passages from the

Ching.

from the Mencius, Chung Yung, and from other classical texts, the Neo-Confucians constructed a metaphysical system in which to place the older Confucian concerns with moral, social and political questions.

Where the classical Confucians discussed

primary obligations, the Neo-Confucians discussed primary principles; earlier critiques of benevolence and righteousness were followed by critiques of ether and matter; and whereas the classical texts placed great emphasis on describing the details of ritual sacrifices, the Neo-Confucians described to whom and why the sacrifices were being made.

This is not

to suggest that the Neo-Confucians distorted fundamentally the views or writings of their forerunners.

On the contrary,

they used their metaphysics to justify the earlier Confucian way of life:

spiritual self-cultivation could not proceed

without fulfilling one's many obligations to family and society. Neo-Confucianism came to dominate Chinese intellectual life until the 20th Century.

By the time of the Ming Dynasty

the history and philosophy of China as interpreted by Chu Hsi became required reading for everyone, the Chinese examination system being based on Chu's writings and commentaries on the classics.

In 1422 a major compendium of classical texts, with

the commentaries of Chu Hsi and many other Neo-Confucians, was compiled. C "tí-

It was called the Hsing-li ta-ch'tlan shu ; hereafter cited as the Compendium),

31

and is the Chinese source most often quoted in the Discourse, as it was by the missionaries Longobardi and Ste. Marie. The form of the Compendium is partially responsible for the fact that at times, Leibniz attributes views to philosophers of the ancient period which were actually the views of the Neo-Confucians.

The anthology contains materials that span

twenty-three centuries, and neither Longobardi nor Ste. Marie, who quote at length from the Compendium, always make clear whether they are citing passages from a classical text or from a commentary thereon.

Indeed, parts of the Religion Treatise

and the Mission Treatise suggest that even the two missionaries are not always sure whom, or what, they are quoting; this is especially true for Longobardi, who erroneously attributes much of the compilation of the Compendium to scholars 39 of the 10th Century B.C. The resurgence of Confucianism did not, of course, lead to the demise of Buddhism, nor of Taoism, the second major philosophical and religious tradition indigenous to China. In Chinese religion, however, the several belief systems were not as sharply demarcated, or as exclusive, as Western religious sects have tended to be.

Depending on the locale, the

common people adopted different, but equally rich and complex admixtures of beliefs, rituals, heroes and deities drawn from Confucianism, Taoism, and Buddhism; sufficiently rich and complex that sorting out the distinguishing features of each school of thought was (and continues to be) a difficult task.

32

Moreover, by the time Father Ricci arrived in China to found the first mission, there was a strong syncretic movement among the intelligentsia as well, with many efforts being made w philosophically to merge the "Three Schools into One." This syncretism would leave Confucianism intact as a political, social and moral code, adding to it substantive elements of Buddhist and Taoist metaphysics, theology and liturgy. But at the same time (early 17th Century), there were many Chinese literati who were not religiously oriented at all.

They kept the official state and familial observances

prescribed by the Confucian classics, but were otherwise entirely secular, having little use even for the metaphysical pronouncements of the earlier Neo-Confucians.

It is partly

because of the views of such men that Longbardi, Ste. Marie and other missionaries concluded that the Chinese had to abandon completely their own ways of thinking if they were to become true Christians.

Leibniz did not hold these latter-

day secular Confucians in very high regard, made clear by the epithets -- "Modern Atheists," "Sceptics," and "Hypocrites" —

by which he referred to them in the Discourse. In summary, it is essential to appreciate the peculiar

role played by Confucianism in shaping Chinese thought, culture, and daily life as well.

As a philosophy, with religious over-

tones, Confucianism was the dominant belief system among the literate for most of the last two millenia.

And because

governmental officials were drawn from the ranks of

33

the literate, C o n f u c i a n i s m came to b e the o f f i c a l s t a t e

ideo-

logy as w e l l as the m a j o r i n t e l l e c t u a l f o r c e in C h i n a .

More-

over, b e c a u s e C o n f u c i a n i s m c e l e b r a t e d t r a d i t i o n , w i t h all its r i t u a l s ,

familial o b l i g a t i o n s , a n c e s t o r w o r s h i p , etc.,

w a s e x e m p l i f i e d in the lives of m o s t t r a d i t i o n a l

it

Chinese

c o m m o n e r s , w h o w e r e thereby C o n f u c i a n s by p r a c t i c e e v e n t h o u g h they h a d no f i r s t - h a n d a c q u a i n t a n c e w i t h the p h i l o s o p h i c a l the t r a d i t i o n a l texts.

or

C o n f u c i u s , then, w a s not s i m p l y one

p h i l o s o p h e r a m o n g m a n y ; h i s d e f e n s e a n d e n h a n c e m e n t of the early C h i n e s e h e r i t a g e c a u s e d h i m to b e s e e n as t h e

symbol

of C h i n e s e c i v i l i z a t i o n , a n d h e w a s c o n s e q u e n t l y r e v e r e d e v e n by t h o s e w h o s e v i e w s w e r e d i f f e r e n t ( T a o i s t s a n d B u d d h i s t s ) , a n d b y those w h o c o u l d not r e a d the w r i t i n g s w h i c h t h o s e v i e w s (the c o m m o n p e o p l e ) .

contained

T h u s , the s p i r i t of

Confu-

c i a n i s m w a s r e f l e c t e d s t r o n g l y in the w r i t i n g s a n d a c t i o n s of C o n f u c i a n p h i l o s o p h e r s , a n d in a d d i t i o n , m e a t e d the e n t i r e fabric of C h i n e s e

it t h o r o u g h l y

per-

culture.

A l t h o u g h L e i b n i z o c c a s i o n a l l y a t t r i b u t e s a correct f u c i a n v i e w to the w r o n g C o n f u c i a n , a n d at other t i m e s

Conattri-

b u t e s v i e w s to them w h i c h no C o n f u c i a n held, he d i d a p p r e c i a t e the s i g n i f i c a n c e of the C o n f u c i a n t r a d i t i o n in C h i n a . L i k e F a t h e r R i c c i b e f o r e him, L e i b n i z also a p p r e c i a t e d that no o t h e r b e l i e f s y s t e m w o u l d h a v e an impact in that

country

u n l e s s it came to terms w i t h the c o u n t r y ' s i n t e l l e c t u a l tage.

He

heri-

t h e r e f o r e w r o t e the D i s c o u r s e , a t t e m p t i n g to p o u r

some C h r i s t i a n w i n e in C o n f u c i a n a n d p r e - C o n f u c i a n

bottles.

34

IV.

Outline and Structure of the Discourse For the most part, Leibniz describes his position and ad-

vances his arguments in the Discourse clearly enough to be followed without undue difficulty.

Nevertheless, a brief over-

view of the work may be useful, because the several historical, philosophical and political issues at stake were not as clearly delimited by Leibniz as a modern reader might desire, owing in large measure to the fact that he was not only outlining his own views, but responding to the views of others. The Mission Treatise and the Religion Treatise both make the same arguments with respect to Chinese thought.

Accord-

ing to Fathers Longobardi and Ste. Marie, resemblances between Chinese and Christian concepts were only superficial, especially on issues basic to Christian theology: God, and spiritual substance(s);

1) the nature of

2) the existence and quali-

ties of spirits, and matter; and 3) the immortality of the human soul.

In the opinion of the missionaries the ancient

Chinese thinkers were, at best, materialists; and even this much could not be said for their modern counterparts, who were simply atheists.

To support their position Longobardi

and Ste. Marie cited passages from classical texts, passages from commentaries thereon, and they also quoted at length contemporary Chinese intellectuals (some of them Christian converts) with whom they had spoken. This evidence was 142 placed (according to Leibniz) in a Scholastic philosophical

35

framework, from which their negative theological conclusions are generated.

And these conclusions in turn generate a more

political one equally negative:

because Christian doctrine

is incompatible with Chinese thought, the conversion

of the

Chinese can only proceed by having them abandon altogether their intellectual and cultural heritage in favor of Revealed Christian truth. The Discourse on the Natural Theology of the Chinese is an attempt to counter this position philosophically, and at the most general structural level should be read as an argument modus tollens.

The conclusion —

that conversion of the

Chinese requires abandonment of a 3000 year-old intellectual tradition —

must be false; therefore the premise(s) from

which the conclusion follows must also be false. •»3 There are four sections

in the Discourse, the first

three of which contain Leibniz's detailed replies to the missionaries' claims that Chinese thought is fundamentally incompatible with basic Christian doctrines.

He first argues

(Part I) that the Chinese do indeed have a close conceptual analogue to the Christian concept of God, and spiritual substance.

In Part II, which is almost half of the manuscript,

Leibniz maintains that spirits and matter in China are considered and treated in very nearly the same way angels and matter are considered and treated in Christian Europe. Throughout Parts I and II, Leibniz's arguments regularly take the form that first, Chinese thought is compatible with his

36

own philosophy; second, his own philosophy is compatible with Christianity; therefore Chinese thought is compatible with Christianity.

Part III is devoted to making a similar case

for the compatibility of the Chinese and Christian concepts of the human soul and its immortality. Together the first three parts comprise over nine-tenths of the Discourse.

Part IV appears to be more or less an

appendix to it, the subject under discussion being an exposition of Leibniz's binary arithmetic, and an analogue with it claimed by Leibniz and Bouvet to be found in the trigrams of the I Ching.

Part IV is not, however, an appendix.

On the

contrary, it is an essential ingredient of Leibniz's most fundamental argument, and it must be seen as such in order to appreciate Leibniz's overall view of the nature, history and development of Chinese thought. He accepts, for the most part, the claims of Longobardi and Ste. Marie that many educated Chinese of his own time were atheists.

But, he insists, these moderns have "strayed. . .

from their own antiquity" (§1).

If we focus instead on the

classical texts, he says, "I find [them] quite excellent, and quite in accord with natural theology. . . .

It is pure

Christianity, insofar as it renews the natural law inscribed on our hearts" (§31). To be sure, there are important theological issues on which the classical texts are silent, and even the most famous of Chinese philosophers, Confucius, is occasionally in

37 w "error."

But t h i s only shows, L e i b n i z b e l i e v e d , that w e

h a v e not gone b a c k far e n o u g h in the r e l e v a n t cases.

If w e

r e t u r n to the e r a of t h e s a g e - k i n g s , "we c o u l d u n c o v e r the C h i n e s e w r i t i n g s of the r e m o t e s t a n t i q u i t y m a n y u n k n o w n to m o d e r n C h i n e s e a n d e v e n to t h o s e

in

things

commentators

thought to be c l a s s i c a l " (§68; e m p h a s i s added).

The I Ching

is one s u c h book, a c c o r d i n g to him, a n d if w e r e a d it c a r e fully, w h a t w e w i l l u n c o v e r is the fact that "the

ancient

C h i n e s e h a v e s u r p a s s e d the m o d e r n o n e s in the e x t r e m e , only in p i e t y .

not

. . but in s c i e n c e as w e l l " (§68a).

T h e crucial term in t h i s q u o t e is " s c i e n c e , " w h i c h is w h y P a r t IV is c r u c i a l to the D i s c o u r s e :

"it c o n c e r n s

justifica-

t i o n of the d o c t r i n e s of the ancient C h i n e s e and their s u p e r i o r i t y over the m o d e r n s " (§69).

R e m e m b e r that

a c k n o w l e d g e d the t h e o l o g i c a l w e a k n e s s e s of m o d e r n

Leibniz

Chinese

t h i n k e r s , but m a i n t a i n e d that the a n c i e n t t e x t s —

s o m e of

them p r e - C o n f u c i a n —

theology

strongly suggested a natural

consonant with Christianity, respect.

and t h e r e b y w o r t h y of E u r o p e a n

W h a t b e t t e r w a y to e s t a b l i s h that respect t h a n to

s h o w that the m o s t ancient a u t h o r s of t h o s e texts not only h a d t h e o l o g i c a l ideas s i m i l a r to C h r i s t i a n t h e o l o g y , b u t also developed pure

m a t h e m a t i c s to a point w h i c h h a d only b e e n

r e a c h e d in E u r o p e d u r i n g h i s o w n l i f e t i m e ?

Leibniz believed

(as d i d B o u v e t ) that w h i l e b i n a r y a r i t h m e t i c w a s not the " u n i v e r s a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c " he h a d long sought, it w a s n e v e r t h e l e s s the b a s i s of natural science.

If he c o u l d show,

38

therefore —

to post-Galilean Europe —

that his mathematical

notation had been prefigured 4500 years earlier in China, Leibniz would have a very strong case for denying the conclusion of Fathers Longobardi and Ste. Marie, and for advancing his own view of the proper method for engaging the Chinese in ecumenical dialogue:

show them the truth, but not simply by

quoting from the Bible and giving them telescopes; show them also how both theological and scientific truth could be read in their most ancient writings.

(This argument also provided

Leibniz with an explanation for the silence of Confucius on some important theological issues, and his "mistakes" on others; he, too, had occasionally lost the meaning(s) of the writings of his predecessors, and therefore could not be relied upon uniformly as the ultimate authority on, of or w for Chinese thought.) Seen in this light, Part IV of the Discourse can be read as the coup de grace to the anti-accommodationist position with respect to China.

The text breaks off abruptly, and although

Leibniz continued to write for the remaining months of his life, he never returned to the Discourse to finish it.

The

evidence suggests, however, that philosophically, the manuscript may be substantively complete, and that Leibniz had accomplished what he had set out to do:

provide a sophis-

ticated philosophical and theological framework in which the ecumencial movement in China could go forward.

39

V.

T h e M a n u s c r i p t a n d Its T r a n s l a t i o n D u r i n g the later y e a r s of h i s life L e i b n i z m a i n t a i n e d an

i n t e n s i v e a n d e x t e n s i v e c o r r e s p o n d e n c e w i t h Remond.

T h e text

now k n o w n as the M o n a d o l o g y w a s o r i g i n a l l y a letter w r i t t e n to the latter in 1714, a n d a little o v e r a y e a r later L e i b n i z b e g a n c o m p o s i n g the D i s c o u r s e , respondent.

a d d r e s s e d to the s a m e c o r -

In a letter d a t e d 27 J a n u a r y 1716 L e i b n i z w r o t e >4 ignis.

One should rather say that these Spirits are

spiritual substances, though they are clothed in subtle material bodies.

So has antiquity, both pagan and Chris-

tian, ordinary conceived of the genii, Angels and Demons.

164.

"He made a flame of fire to be His servants."

the Vulgate, Psalm 103, 4.

A paraphrase of

149

The soul returns to Heaven, and is more united than before to the celestial matter diffused everywhere, and thus more capable of conforming to the will of God, quite like the 165

angels it resembles.

So have the ancient Chinese appar-

ently understood it, when they have said that the soul is joined again to Heaven, and to the Xangti. §64

These Fathers, or rather those who have given their

impressions to the Fathers, having misused the Chinese axiom that everything is one -- i.e., that all participates in the one -- would have us believe that according to the Chinese everything is only matter but in different dispositions; that the Xangi itself is only that

[i.e., matter],

and so too is the Li^ -- "Reason" or primitive substance -and that everything participates in matter's perfection according to its own measure of the same.

Consequently,

they would want the return of the soul to the Xangti to be nothing other than its dissolution into ethereal matter, it losing all knowledge gained through its bodily organs. They could say, with even more likelihood, conforming to the opinions of the Manicheans and the Averroists, that God or the Ld^ or the Xangti is the soul of the world, which creates individual souls by acting on organic bodies, and which puts an end to them as soon as they are decomposed.

165.

See §2 and fn. 10.

150

But besides the fact that these opinions are also contrary 166

to reason and to the nature of the individual,

these

opinions are also contrary to the passage from the Chinese Author (cited by Father Longobardi) who clearly distinguishes the Universal Nature -- the Li and the Xangti -from the particular nature of the soul.

The Universal

Nature (the Chinese author says), neither comes nor goes, but the soul comes and goes, rises and descends.

That is,

it is sometimes united to a coarse body, sometimes to a more noble one, and this gives us to understand that it continues to subsist, for otherwise it would return to the Universal Nature. §64a

Now let us see how Father de S. Marie speaks about

it (p. 40):

the Chinese have various errors concerning

human souls.

Some believe that they do not die at all,

that they simply move on and proceed to animate different bodies, human and animal.

Others believe that they

descend into Hell from whence they come out after some 167

time.

Still other Chinese acknowledge the souls as im-

mortal, claiming that they wander in the farthest mountains, 166 calling these souls Xin-Sien, under which name they have

166.

See §23.

167.

Buddhists held the first view, and some Buddhists and many Tao-

ists held the second. 168.

Shen-hsien

^tl)

, another name for "Immortals."

108.) This was a fairly pervasive view in China.

(See fn.

151

certain chapels dedicated to them.

The literati and the

better educated believe that our souls are small portions of subtle air or a firelike and celestial vapor, detached from the most subtle matter of Heaven from whence they draw their origins; which, once they leave their bodies, rise again to Heaven which is their center and from whence they issue and where again they intermingle.

The Chinese

169

Philosophical Suntma Singlitaciven,

Vol. 28 -- a treatise

concerning the soul and the body -- says that the suitable and true origin of the ethereal soul is in Heaven, to which the ethereal soul soars [after death] to become one and the same substance with it.

The origin of the body is

the Earth into which it dissolves and transforms itself [after death].

The author of this particular work is from

a later time and his authority does not approach that of the ancients.

However, one need not ignore this passage.

I believe that the translation of it suffers somewhat from the prejudice of the translator [i.e., St. Marie], when he states that the soul becomes the same substance with Heaven.

Perhaps the Chinese author only wants to say

that the two are united after death.

But even if the pas-

sage were to say what [St. Marie] makes it say, such very general expressions can always be given a [different, but

169.

The Compendium.

Leibniz is quoting Ste. Marie directly.

152

equally] rational m e a n i n g .

For all c e l e s t i a l spirits

are

of the s u b s t a n c e of H e a v e n , and the soul, b e c o m i n g a c e l e s t i a l S p i r i t , b e c o m e s thereby of the same with Heaven.

substance

But by H e a v e n is u n d e r s t o o d the w h o l e

celes-

170

tial H i e r a r c h y , e x e r c i t u s C o e l o r u m , M o n a r c h of the U n i v e r s e .

under the

Grand

This H e a v e n is not simply

v i s i b l e sky, for a c c o r d i n g to the o p i n i o n s of the c i t e d a b o v e , H e a v e n ' s air extends e v e r y w h e r e .

(with its c e l e s t i a l

the

Chinese

Spirits)

Thus it is n o t n e c e s s a r y ,

according

to them, to c o n c e i v e of souls as c o m p l e t e l y d i s t i n c t Heaven.

from

To talk of w a n d e r i n g here and there in the m o u n -

t a i n s , rising a n d d e s c e n d i n g , b e i n g at the side of the X a n g t i , a n d so forth, are only i m a g i s t i c w a y s of §65

The

[Chinese concept]

speaking.

of i m m o r t a l i t y of the soul

w i l l b e c o m e c l e a r e r if one interprets ancient C h i n e s e

doc-

trine as saying that souls r e c e i v e r e w a r d and p u n i s h m e n t after this life. the C o n f u c i a n s ]

It is true that the literati sect speak n e i t h e r of P a r a d i s e nor H e l l ,

the Chinese C h r i s t i a n , Dr. M i c h a e l , r e g r e t f u l l y ledges this p o u n d s both.

[i.e., and

acknow-

(17: 95) in p r a i s i n g the sect of Foe w h i c h pro171

It also a p p e a r s that m o d e r n C h i n e s e , w h o

170.

"The Army of the Heavens."

171.

Ironically, the v i e w w h i c h Leibniz applauds here and in the next

paragraph comes from Buddhism, not Confucianism.

153

w i s h to p a s s for b e i n g the m o s t e n l i g h t e n e d , r i d i c u l e [Buddhist] v i e w w h e n one talks to them of a n o t h e r (17: 89).

this

life

But p e r h a p s they will not a l w a y s r i d i c u l e it if

they c o n s i d e r that this s u p r e m e s u b s t a n c e -- w h i c h on their o w n g r o u n d s is the source of w i s d o m a n d j u s t i c e -- c o u l d n o t act less p e r f e c t l y on the spirits a n d the souls w h i c h it c r e a t e s , t h a n a w i s e king in his r e a l m acts u p o n his s u b j e c t s w h o m he d i d n o t create of his o w n w i l l , a n d w h o m it is m o r e d i f f i c u l t for h i m to g o v e r n since they do not depend upon him absolutely.

Thus this K i n g d o m of the

Spirits u n d e r this g r e a t M a s t e r c a n n o t be less

orderly

t h a n a K i n g d o m of m e n , a n d c o n s e q u e n t l y it follows

that

v i r t u e s h o u l d be r e w a r d e d and v i c e p u n i s h e d u n d e r this e r n a n c e , j u s t i c e b e i n g i n s u f f i c i e n t l y done in this §65a gested.

T h i s is also w h a t the a n c i e n t Chinese have

life. sug-

We have a l r e a d y n o t e d that they p l a c e a w i s e

v i r t u o u s E m p e r o r at the side of the X a n g t i a n d that c o n s i d e r the souls of great m e n as a n g e l s Father de S. M a r i e

gov-

and

they

incarnate.

(p. 27) cites the X i - K i n g

(one of the

five p r i n c i p a l books of the l i t e r a t i ) , w h i c h makes of some of their ancient k i n g s , w h o , after their rise to H e a v e n in o r d e r to e n l i g h t e n a n d help

mention

death,

(I b e l i e v e

this s h o u l d be t r a n s l a t e d "to a s s i s t a n d serve") this e x a l t e d k i n g X a n g t i , a n d to sit at his right and left

very

154

172

side.

It is said in the same book that these kings,

rising from the earth to Heaven, and descending from Heaven to earth, can favor and abet the Kingdom as its patrons and protectors. §66

173

The worship of ancestors and great men

instituted

by the ancient Chinese can indeed have for its goals, to display the gratitude of the living as they cherish the rewards of Heaven, and to excite men to perform actions which render them worthy of the recognition of posterity. However, the ancients speak as if the Spirits of virtuous ancestors, surrounded by the aura of glory at the Court of the Monarch of Universe, were capable of obtaining good and evil for their descendants.

And it appears by this at

least that they have conceived of them as continuing to s ub s i s t.

§66a

It is instructive to see how they explicate this

matter.

According to the account of Father de S. Marie

(p. 21ff.), Confucius makes the Emperor Xum

172.

m

author of

This is Ste. Marie's Interpretation of the same Shih Chlng pas-

sage cited by Leibniz via Longobardi in §58.

The "author" referred

to below is Chu Hsi. 173.

Leibniz is quoting Ste. Marie directly, except for the paren-

thetical remark. 174.

Shun.

See fn. 129.

155

the Ancestor worship

(Chung-Jung, Chpt. 17); this Emperor

was the fifth after the Foundation of the Monarchy

(ac-

175

cording to the Tung-Kien)

-- i.e., the Royal Chronology,

or Universal History, one of the classical texts).

Con-

fucius praises him in the extreme and attributes the prosperity of176 the Empire to the worship he instituted and also Ch. 78,

in which he proffers the ancient kings as

models for posterity.

He also says towards the end of this

chapter that anyone who understood perfectly what the worship of Heaven and Earth comprised, and the proper reason for sacrificing to his ancestors, would be able to assure himself a peaceful prosperity and a wise government

through-

out the kingdom with as much certainty as if he held them in his very hand. §67

177

It is true that the Chinese scholars speak neither

of Hell nor of purgatory, but it is possible that some among

175.

The Tzu-chih t'ung-chien

^

fy

, known as the Compre-

hensive Mirror, Is a major history of China written by the famous scholar and statesman, Ssu-ma Kuang

, (1018-1086).

It is not clear

from Longobardi's text that he has used this work, however.

More proba-

bly he was using the T'ung-chien kang-mu

,

Outline of the Comprehensive Mirror —

0

—

an abridgement of Ssu-ma Kuang's

work by Chu Hsi. 176.

Ste. Marie and Leibniz have 78 here, but it should be 19.

177.

This well known example can also be found in Lun Yu 3: 11, and in

the Li Chi (Legge, vol. XI, p. 272).

156

them believe or have believed at other times that the wandering souls which prowl here and there in the mountains and the forests are in a sort of purgatory.

We have al-

178

ready spoken of these wandering souls.

Without making

too much of a comparison between the opinions of the Christians and the pagans, one could nevertheless say that there is something approaching this in the life of St. Conrad, a Bishop of Constance, whose biography is published 179 in the second volume of my collection,

where it is re-

corded that he and his friend St. Udalric discovered souls in the form of birds condemned to the waterfalls of the Rhine which they saved by their prayers.

So too, perhaps,

according to some of these Chinese literati, ancient or modern, souls deserving of punishment become spirits destined to lowly stations, guarding doors and tending kitchens and furnaces until they have expiated themselves. We are not sufficiently conversant with the doctrine of the scholars on these matters to go into detail about them.

178.

In §58 and §64a.

179.

Scrlptores R e r u m Brunsvlcenslum.

II, 1710, pp. 7-8.

Hanover:

N. Foerster, vol.

157

ISO [IV.

Concerning the Characters which Fohi,

Founder of

the Chinese Empire, used in His Writings and Binary Arithmetic] §68

It is indeed apparent that if we Europeans were well

enough informed concerning Chinese Literature, then, with the aid of logic, critical thinking, mathematics and our manner of expressing thought -- more exacting than theirs -we could uncover in the Chinese writings of the remotest antiquity many things unknown to modern Chinese and even to other commentators thought to be classical.

Reverend

Father Bouvet and I have discovered the meaning, apparently truest to the text, of the characters of Fohi, founder of the Empire, which consist simply of combinations of unbroken and broken lines, and which pass for the most ancient writing of China in its simplest form. figures contained in the book called Ye Kim, Book of Changes. Ven Vam

180.

182

There are 64 181

that is, the

Several centuries after Fohi, the Emperor

and his son Cheu Cum, and Confucius more than five

Fu Hsi.

See the Introduction, pp. 17-18, 22.

See also fn. 79

from the text.

181.

I Chlng.

182.

Again, King Wen; this time the spelling is Bouvet's.

is Chou Kung

"Cheu Cum"

, the Duke of Chou and King Wen's brother.

was one of Confucius' favorite culture heroes.

He

158

centuries later, have all sought therein philosophical mysteries.

Others have even wanted to extract from them a

sort of Geomancy and other follies.

Actually, the 64

figures represent a Binary Arithmetic which apparently this great legislator [Fohi] possessed, and which I have rediscovered some thousands of years later. §68a

In Binary Arithmetic, there are only two signs, 0 183

and 1, with which one can write all numbers.

When I com-

municated this system to the Reverend Father Bouvet, he recognized in it the characters of Fohi, for the numbers 0 184 and 1 correspond to them exactly

if we put a broken line

for 0 and an unbroken line for the unity, 1.

This Arith-

metic furnishes the simplest way of making changes, since there are only two components, concerning which I wrote a small essay in my early youth, which was reprinted a long 165 time afterwards against my will. So it seems that Fohi

183.

At this point Leibniz wrote, but then crossed out the following:

"I have since found that it further expresses the logic of dichotomies which is of the greatest use, if one always retains an exact opposition between the numbers of the division." 184.

At this point, Leibniz wrote, but then crossed out the following:

"provided that one places before a number as many zeroes as necessary so that the least of the numbers has as many lines as the greatest." 185.

In a letter to Remond in July, 1714 Leibniz wrote about:

"a lit-

tle schoolboyish essay called 'On the Art of Combinations,' published in 1666, and later reprinted without my permission." p. 620.

See also Loemker, vol. II, pp. 1067-68.

Gerhardt, vol. Ill,

159

had insight into the science of combinations, but the Arithmetic having been completely lost, later Chinese have not taken care to think of them in this [arithmetical] way and they have made of these characters of Fohi some kind of symbols and Hieroglyphs, as one customarily does when one has strayed from the true meaning (as the good Father Kirker has done with respect to the script of the Egyptian 186

obelisks of which he understands nothing).

Now this

shows also that the ancient Chinese have surpassed the modern ones in the extreme, not only in piety (which is the basis of the most perfect morality) but in science as well. §69

Since this Binary Arithmetic, although explained in 1S7

the Miscellany of Berlin,

is still little known, and men-

tion of its parallelism with the characters of Fohi is found only in the German journal of the year 1705 of the IBS late Mr. Tenzelius, I want to explain it here -- where it

186.

Athanasius Klrcher (1601-1680), a German Jesuit scholar interested

in mathematics, Hebrew, hieroglyphics and archaeology. with Inventing the magic lantern.

He is credited

In Lach (2), Jean Baruzi is cited as

saying that Kircher corresponded with Leibniz about China as early as 1670 (p. 439). 187.

"De periodis columnarum in serie numerorum progressionis Arith-

meticae Dyadice expressorum," by P. Dangicourt, in Miscellanea Berlinensla, I (1701), 336-376.

This and the Tenzel article cited below (fn.

188) were both instigated by Leibniz himself. 188.

"Erklärung der Arithmeticae binariae

See Zacher, p. 1. ," in Curleuse bib-

llothec oder Fortsetzung der Monatlichen Unterredungen einiger guten

160

appears to be very appropriate -- since it concerns justification of the doctrines of the ancient Chinese and their superiority over the moderns.

169

I will only add before 190

turning to this matter that the late Mr. Andreas Muller, native of Greiffenhagen, Provost of Berlin, a man of Europe, who without ever having left it, had studied the Chinese characters closely, and published with notes, what Abdalla Beidavaeus wrote on China.

This Arab author re-

marks that Fohi had found a peculiare scribendi genus Arithmeticam, contractus et Rationaria, a peculiar manner 191 of writing, of arithmetic, of contracts, and of accounts. What he says confirms my explanation of the characters of this ancient philosopher-king whereby they are reduced to numbers. Freunde , ed., W.E. Tenzel (Frankfurt and Leipzig,1705), pp. 81-112. See Zacher, p. 210. Leibniz omits mention of his own, earlier endeavor concerning binary arithmetic and its relationship to the characters of Fu Hsi, written in 1703:

"Explication de 1' Arithmétique Binaire qui se sert des seuls

caractères 0 et 1; avec des Remarques sur son utilité, et sur ce qu'elle donne le sens des anciennes figures Chinoises de Fohi," par M. Leibniz, Histoire de l'Academie Royale des Sciences, Année 1703; avec les Mémoires . . . pour la même Année, Paris 1705 [Mem.], pp. 85-89. A more readable and available edition of this work is found in Zacher, pp. 293-301. 189.

See Introduction, p. 37.

190.

1630Î-1694.

191.

The hexagrams were never used for this purpose; Leibniz is quoting

For a study of Müller on China, see Lach (3).

directly from Tenzel.

See also Zacher, p. 159.

161

§70

The ancient R o m a n s made use of a m i x e d

arithmetic,

q u i n a r y and d e n a r y , and one still sees reminders of it

in

192

their c o u n t e r s .

One sees, from A r c h i m e d e s ' w o r k on

the

193

c o u n t i n g of the s a n d , approaching

that already

in his time

denary a r i t h m e t i c w a s u n d e r s t o o d

(which has

come down to us from the A r a b s and w h i c h appears been brought

II).

This p r e v a l e n c e of base

seems to come from the fact that we h a v e as this n u m b e r

192.

to have

from S p a i n , or at least m a d e m o r e k n o w n by

the renowned G e194r b e r t , later P o p e , u n d e r the name Sylvester

something

10

of

arithmetic

10 f i n g e r s , but

is a r b i t r a r y , some have p r o p o s e d

counting

Leibniz is talking of the Roman numerals, which except for unity

(I), are based on either five (V, L, D) or ten (X, C, M), hence the mixed nature of their numeration or counting, but not necessarily of their arithmetic, about which little is known.

The purpose of the

Roman counters, originally pebbles (calculi), is uncertain; it has been argued that they were used in games such as backgammon or checkers, or even like poker chips. 193.

See Smith, vol. II, pp. 165-66.

"Archimedes saw the defects of the Greek number system, and in

his Sand Reckoner he suggested an elaborate scheme of numeration, arranging the numbers in octads, or the eighth powers of ten."

Ibid.,

vol. I, 113. 194.

Gerbert, who was Pope from 999 to 1003, has traditionally been

held responsible for introducing the Arabic numerals into Christian Europe, which he probably learned while studying in Spain.

Leibniz is

wrong in thinking that Gerbert introduced the decimal or denary system, rather than simply the nine characters.

"He probably did not know of

the zero, and at any rate he did not know its real significance." Ibid., vol. II, 74-75; see also, Ibid., vol. I, 195-196.

162

195

by dozens, and dozens of dozens, etc.

On the other

hand,

the late Mr. Erhard Weigelius resorts to a lesser number predicated on 196the quaternary or Tetractys like the Pythagoreans;

thus, just as in the decimal progression we

write all numbers using 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, he would write all numbers

in his quaternary progression 2

0, 1, 2, 3; for example

321 for him signifies

3x4 +2x4

rather 48+16+1, that is 65 according to the ordinary §71

using 1 +i

numbers could be written by 0 and 1 in the binary or dual

195.

Thus:

Leibniz himself toyed briefly with a base 12 (and even mentioned

a base 16) number system and may have gotten the idea from Pascal. See Zacher, pp. 17-21. 196.

Erhard Weigel (1625-1699) was professor of Mathematics at the

University of Jena, where Leibniz followed his lectures for one semester in 1663.

Having been influenced strongly by the Pythagorean and

other mystical traditions in mathematics, Weigel saw the number 4 as the perfect number and constructed a base 4 number system.

Although

Weigel influenced Leibniz in many areas (e.g., the need for linguistic and legal reforms in Germany), the latter saw no need for such a number system.

Practically, a base 10 or even higher number system

(12 or 16) shortened calculations and condensed enumeration; theoretically, a base 2 system was best, since it had the simplest and most easily analyzable base.

Couturat, pp. 473-474.

r

system.

This gives me the opportunity to point out that all

progression.

0

163 1 10 100 1000 10000 100000 1000000

1 2 4 8 16 32 64

10 is equal to 2 100 is equal to 4 1000 is equal to 8 etc.

And accordingly, numbers are expressed as follows:

These terms correspond with the hypothesis; for example: 111=100+10+1=4+2+1=7 11001=10000+1000+1=16+4+1=25

137

They can also be found by continual addition of unity, for example:

10

The points denote unity which is kept in mind in 19s ordinary calculation.

~ll ..1 "lCW 101 110 HI Tooo

197.

The mistake is Leibniz's; k_ should be 8^.

198.

See §72 for explanation.

0 1 10 11 100 101 110 111 1000 1001 1010 1011 1100 1101 1110 1111 10000 10001 10010 10011 10100 10101 10110 10111 11000 11001 11010 11011 11100 11101 11110 11111 100000 etc.

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 etc

164

5 71a

But, to continue, if one wishes to make a table ex-

pressing terms for all the natural numbers in order, one need not calculate, since it is sufficient to note that each column is periodic, the same periodicity recurring ad infinitum:

the first column runs 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 1, etc.;

the second 0, 0, 1, 1, 0, 0, 1, 1, etc; the third 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 1, 1, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 1, 1, 1, etc.; the fourth 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, etc.

And so on with

further columns, assuming that the empty places above each column are filled with zeroes.

Thus one can write these

columns at once and accordingly make up the table of natural numbers without any calculation.

This is what one

can call enumeration. §72

As for addition, it is simply done by counting and

making periods when there are numbers to add together, adding up each column as usual, which will be done as follows:

count the unities of the column; for example, for

29, look how this number is written in the table, to wit, by 11101; thus you write 1 under the column and put periods under the second, third and fourth column thereafter. These periods denote that it is necessary to count out one unity further in the column following. §73

Subtraction is just as easy.

Multiplication is re-

duced to simple additions and has no need of the Pythagorean

165

table, times

it s u f f i c i n g 1 is 0, t h a t

574

to k n o w t h a t 0 t i m e s

1 t i m e s 0 is 0, a n d t h a t

In d i v i s i o n t h e r e

calculation.

0 is 0, t h a t 0 1 times

is no n e e d to t a l l y as i n

O n e m u s t o n l y see if t h e d i v i s o r

or lesser than the p r e c e d i n g remainder. the s i g n of t h e q u o t i e n t

is

is 0, in the s e c o n d c a s e

§75

1.

ordinary greater

In t h e f i r s t

t h e d i v i s o r m a y be s u b t r a c t e d f r o m t h e p r e c e d i n g to get a n o t h e r

1 is

case,

it is

1;

remainder

remainder.

These are simplifications

by a clever m a n since

that have been

the i n t r o d u c t i o n of this

proposed Arithmetic

199

into c e r t a i n c a l c u l a t i o n s . this binary

B u t the p r i n c i p a l u t i l i t y

s y s t e m is t h a t it c a n do m u c h to p e r f e c t

science of numbers, because all calculations cording

to p e r i o d i c i t y .

the

are made

It is s o m e a c h i e v e m e n t t h a t

n u m e r i c a l p o w e r s of the same o r d e r , made by raising

acthe

the

o r d e r e d n a t u r a l n u m b e r s , however h i g h the order, never a g r e a t e r number of p e r i o d s s e l v e s w h i c h are t h e i r r o o t s

t h a n the n a t u r a l n u m b e r s . . . .

of

have

them-

[Text b r e a k s o f f

at

this

point.]

199.

Leibniz is referring to Arithmeticus perfectus, Qui Tria numerare

nescit, seu Arithmetic dualis (Prague, 1712) by W.J. Pelican.

Pelican

apparently showed how one can use the binary system for other calculations as well, i.e., fractional arithmetic, roots and proportions. See Zacher, p. 211.

167

APPENDIX VARIANT READINGS O F TEXT

W h a t follows is a list of all the variant readings w h e r e the autograph differs from the best printed text, i.e., the Loosen-Vonessen edition.

Paragraph numbers follow that edition.

W e have not noted the many

instances where Loosen-Vonessen have either added or corrected the page numbers Leibniz noted in referring to the texts of Longobardi and SainteMarie.

Paragraph: 51: for "considerable de son temps," read "considerable en son temps" §2: for "Philosophes et les Peres," read "Philosophes et Peres" §2: for "ressemblent à ces Chrestiens," read "ressemblent à des Chrestiens" §2: for "ou Anges ne nient," read "ou Anges avec des anciens peres ou philosophes n e nient" §3: for "on ne pourra pas luy," read "on n e pourra luy" §3: for "n'étant point encore fait," read "n'étant point fait encore" 511: for "se contredisent. Mais," read "se contredisent véritables. M a i s " 511: for "réfutant et rebutant," read "réfutant et faison [?] rebutant" 511: for "la plus uniforme," read "la plus raisonnable" §13: for "legerement toutes leurs Ecoles," read "legerement toute leur Ecole" 516: for "(ouvrage des plus ordinaires

hez," read (ouvrage des plus

originaires chez" §16: for "une traduction bien," read "une transaction bien" §17: for "et qui entendoit parfaitement," read "et qui savoit parfaitement" 518: for "en les expliquant de," read "en l'expliquant de" §20: for "qu'il n'y en a point de," read "qu'il n'y a point de"

168

§21: for "directrice et productlce," read "directrice et productrice" §30: for "souiller les vertus et les perfections," read "souiller les perfections" §32: for "autant de systèmes d u Monde," read "autant de systèmes M o n dains" §34: for "Hiaxi," read "Hia Xi" §34a: for "qu'il avoit eue avec," read "qu'il a eue avec" §35: for "il confondoit des choses différents," read "il confondoit des different choses" §38: for "par ordre d u Roy," read "par ordre Royal," §38: for "il y a plus de 300 ans," read "il y a quelques plus de 300 ans" §39: for "separeroient l'incertain d u certain," read "separeroient le certain" §41: for "cela étant, ainsi que seroit-ce," read "cela étant, que ce seroit ce que" §43: for "des esprits) n e s'ensuive. Et," read "des esprits)

s'ensuive.

Et" §48: for "des Machines préparées pour cela," read "des Machines préparées à cela" §48a: for "parce qu'il jugeoit," read "parce qu'ils jugeoit" §50: for " e n conclure encore, que," read "en conclure encore de ce silence affecté de Confucius, que" §53: for "activité o u son influence," read "activité o u influence" §54a: for "ou si vous voulés a u Li," read "ou si voulés a u Li" §54b: for "peuple a le droit de sacrifier," read "peuple a droit de sacrifier" §55: for "comme son palais," read "comme à son palais" §55: for "terre, sur les montagnes," read "terre, les montagnes" §55: for "favorable par des Sacrifices," read "favorable par ses Sacrifices" §55: for "que les sages se contentent," read "que sages se contentent" §63: for "de Dieu, de m ê m e que les Anges," read "de D i e u , tout comme les Anges" §64: for "que selon les Chinois," read "que tout selon les Chinois"

169

§74: for "qu'on talonne comme," read "qu'on tâtonne comme."

[See Zacher,

p. 210, n. 378.]

L o o s e n and Vonessen regularly, b u t not uniformly, include in brackets brief passages w h i c h Leibniz crossed-out in the manuscript.

On only three

occasions did w e believe the crossed out material added to a n understanding of the text.

See textual footnotes 18, 183, and 184.

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY Note:

Standard philosophical works, including those of Leibniz, are

cited in the notes, but are not listed below except when a quotation was taken from a particular edition. Allen, D., (ed.), Leibniz: Theodicy (Abridged).

Indianapolis; Bobbs-

Merrill, 1966. Beck, L.W., Early German Philosophy.

Cambridge: Harvard University

Press, 1969. Benoit, C., and others, trans.,"The Leibniz-Bouvet Correspondence." Burlington, Vt. Bernard, Henri, "Chu Hsi's Philosophy and Its Interpretation by Leibniz," in T'ien Hsia Monthly, volume V, no. 1, 1937. Bodde,Derk, "Harmony and Conflict in Chinese Philosophy," in Studies in Chinese Thought, ed. Arthur F. Wright.

Chicago:

University of

Chicago Press, 1953. Chan Wing-tsit, "The Evolution of the Neo-Confucian Concept of Li As Principle," in the Tsing Hua Journal of Chinese Studies, new series, volume IV, no. 2, 1964. Collins, J., The Thomistic Philosophy of the Angels.

Washington: Catho-

lic University of America Press, 1947. Couturat, Louis, La Logique de Leibniz.

Hildesheim: Olms, 1961.

Creel, Herrlee G., "Was Confucius Agnostic?"

T'oung Pao, volume XXIX,

1932. Cross, F.L. (ed.), The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church.

London:

Oxford University Press, 1954. deBary, Wm. T., "Some Common Tendencies in Neo-Confucianism," in Confucianism in Action, ed. David S. Nivison and Arthur F. Wright. Stanford:

Stanford University Press, 1959.

171

De Groot, J.J.M., The Religious System of China, 6 vols.

Taipei: Ch'eng-

wen Reprint Co., 1969. d'Elia, Pasquale, Gallleo in China.

Cambridge:

Harvard University

Press, 1960. Dutens, Ludovici, ed., G.G. Leibnitii:

Opera Omnia, 6 vols.

Geneva:

Fratres de Tournes, 1768. Eckert, H., G.W. Leibniz' Scrlptores Rerum Brunsvicensium. und Historiographische Bedeutung.

Frankfurt:

Entstehung

V. Klostermann, 1971.

Edwards, P., (ed.), The Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 8 vols.

New York:

Macmillan, 1967. Fingarette, Herbert, Confucius - The Secular as Sacred.

New York:

Har-

per and Row, 1972. Fung Yu-lan, History of Chinese Philosophy, 2 vols., trans. Derk Bodde. Princeton:

Princeton University Press, 1952.

Gerhardt, Carl, ed., Die philosophischen Schriften von G.W. Leibniz, 7 vols.

Berlin:

Weidmannsiche Buchhandlung, 1875-1890.

Goodrich, Anne S., The Peking Temple of the Eastern Peak.

Nagoya: Monu-

menta Serica, 1964. Hoffman, E., and Klibansky, R. (eds.), Nicolaus Cusanus: norantia.

Leipzig:

De Poeta Ig-

F. Meiner, 1932.

Karlgren, Bernhard (1), Grammata Serica. Taipei:

Ch'eng-wen Reprint

Co., 1966. (2), trans. The Book of Documents.

Stockholm:

Museum of Far

Eastern Antiquities, 1950. (3), trans.

The Book of Odes.

Stockholm:

Museum of Far East-

ern Antiquities, 1950. Keightley, David, Sources of Shang History: of Bronze Age China.

Berkeley:

The Oracle-Bone Inscriptions

University of California Press,

forthcoming. Kortholt, Christian, ed., Leibnitii Eplstolae ad diversos. B.C. Breitkopf, 1735.

Leipzig:

172

Lach, Donald F., ed. Honolulu:

(1) The Preface to Leibniz' NOVISSIMA

SINICA.

University of H a w a i i Press, 1957.

(2), "Leibniz and China," in Journal of the History of Ideas, v o l ume VI, 1945. (3), "The Chinese Studies of Andreas M U l l e r , " in the Journal of the A m e r i c a n Oriental Society, volume LX, 1940. Legge, James, trans.

The Chinese Classics, 2nd rev. ed., 7 vols.

Shanghai, 1894. (2), L i Chi:

Book of Rites, 2 vols., w i t h a new Introduction by

C. and W . Chai.

New H y d e Park:

University Books, 1967.

Loemker, L., Philosophical Papers and Letters, 2 vols.

Chicago:

Uni-

versity of Chicago Press, 1956. Longobardi, Nicholas, De Confucio Ejusque Doctrina Tractatus. 1701.

Paris,

(In Dutens and Kortholt).

Malebrance, Nicholas,"A Dialogue Between a Christian Philosopher and a Chinese Philosopher: George stengren.

O n the Nature and Existence of God,"trans, by

Mt. Pleasant, Mich.

Merkel, F.R., G.W. Leinbiz und die China-Mission.

Eine Untersuchung

über die Anfänge der protestantische Missionsbewegung.

Leipzig:

Hinrichs, 1920. Meyer, R.W., Leibnitz and the Seventeenth-Century Revolution. England:

Cambridge,

Bowes and Bowes, 1952.

Morrow, G. (trans.), Plato's Epistles.

Indianapolis:

Bobbs-Merrill,

1962. Mungello, David, Leibniz and Neo-Confucianism: Honolulu:

University Press of Hawaii,

The Search for Accord.

forthcoming.

Needham, Joseph, Science and Civilization in China, 7 volumes, in p r o gress.

Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press, 1954 - .

New Catholic Encyclopaedia, 16 vols.

New York:

McGraw-Hill, 1967.

173

Parkinson, G.H., (ed.)> Leibniz: London:

Philosophical Writings (rev. ed.).

J.M. Dent, 1973.

Peters, F.E., Greek Philosophical Terms, A Historical Lexicon.

New York:

New York University Press, 1967. Quasten, J., Patrology, 3 vols.

Utrecht:

Spectrum, 1950.

Riley, P., "An Unpublished Lecture by Leibniz on the Greeks as Founders of Rational Theology: dence*. "

Its Relation to His 'Universal Jurispru-

Journal of the History of Philosophy, volume XIV, no. 2.

Rolt, C.E., Dionysius the Areopagite on the Divine Names and The Mystical Theology.

New York:

Macmillan, 1951.

Rosemont, Henry, Jr., "Review Article:

Herbert Fingarette's Confucius -

The Secular as Sacred," in Philosophy East and West, vol. 26, no.4, 1976. Ste. Marie, Antonio C., Traite sur quelques points importants de la Mission de la Chine.

Paris, 1701.

(In Dutens and Kortholt).

Schneweis, E., Angels and Demons according to Lactantlus.

Washington:

Catholic University of America Press, 1944. Schwartz, Benjamin, "Some Polarities in Confucian Thought," in Confucianism in Action, ed. David S. Nivison and Arthur F. Wright. Stanford:

Stanford University Press, 1959.

Sivin, Nathan, "Copernicus in China," Studia Copernicana, Smith, D.E., History of Mathematics, 2 vols.

Boston:

vol. 6, 1973.

Ginn and Co.,

1925. Van Den Wyngaert, A., ed. Sinica Franciscana, 16 vols.

Collegium

S. Bonaventurae, 1929-1936. Waley, Arthur (1), "Leibniz and Fu Hsi," in the Bulletin of the London School of Oriental Studies, volume II, 1921. trans. (2), The Book of Songs.

New York:

trans. (3), The Analects of Confucius.

Grove Press, 1960.

New York:

Modern Library, n.d.

174

Werner, E.T.C., ed., Dictionary of Chinese Mythology.

Shanghai:

Kelly

and Walsh, Ltd., 1932. Wiener, Philip P., ed., Leibniz:

Selections.

New York:

Charles Scrib-

ner's Sons, 1951. Wilhelm, Hellmut, (1) "Leibniz and the I Ching," in Collectanea Commissiones Synodalis, no. 16, 1943. (2), Change:

Eight Lectures on the I Ching.

New York:

Pan-

theon Books, 1960. Wilhelm, Richard, The I Ching or Book of Changes, translated into English by Cary F. Baynes.

New York:

Pantheon Books, 1962.

Wittkower, R., Architectural Principles in the Age of Humanism. York:

New

Random House, 1965.

Wright, Arthur F., Buddhism in Chinese History.

New York:

Atheneum,

1965. Zacher, H.J., Die Hauptschriften zur Dyadlk von G.W. Leibniz. trag zur Geschichte des binären Zahlensystems. Frankfurt:

Ein BeiV. Klos-

termann, 1973. Zeller, E., Outlines of the History of Greek Philosophy (13th ed. rev.). New York:

Meridian Books, 1955.

(2) The Stoics, Epicureans and Sceptics.

(Rev. ed.; New York:

Russell and Russell, 1962. Zempliner, Arthur, "Gedanken Uber die erste deutsche Übersetzung von Leibniz' Abhandlung Uber die chinesische Philosophie," in Studla Leibnitiana, volume II, 1970.

INDEX

Accoinmodationism:

advocated by Ricci, 11; attacked b y Longobardi,

11-12;

attacked by others, 12 Accursius, Franciscus, Ancestors: Angels:

116-117

sacrifices to, 138, 139-140; neglect of, 141n; worship of, 154.

compared to Chinese spirits, 35, 115; as spiritual substances,

55-56, 58, 148; Leibniz on, 56n; place of, 127; great m e n as incarnations of, 145-146, 153.

See also Spirits

Animals, souls of, 112, 121, 123 Aquinas, St. Thomas, 93 Arabs, arithmetic of, 161 Archimedes, 161 Aristophanes, 105 Aristotle, 117; o n celestial spheres, 58; o n entelecheia, 76n; o n Parmenide» and Melissus, 87, 88n Arithmetic:

binary, 158; Roman, mixed, 161.

See also Binary arithmetic

Atheism, ascribed to Chinese, 34, 120-121, 132 Augustine, St., 55n-56n, 115, 146 Averroists (Averroism), 69, 90, 146, 149

Bartolus of Saxoferrato,

116-117

Beidavaeus, Abdalla, 160 Benedict XIV, 13 Binary Arithmetic:

and trigrams of I Ching, 14, 16, 22-23, 157-158;

in Discourse, 36, 37; Leibniz on, 158-162; explained,

162-165

Bouvet, Joachim, 8; career of, 13-14; theories of, 14-16, 49; o n the I Ching, 22-23, 36,46; on Patriarchs, 94n; on characters of F u Hsi, 157