The Japanese Journal of American Studies, No. 20 (2009)

Emerson and Zhu Xi:
The Role of the “Scholar” in Pursuing “Peace”

Yoshio TAKANASHI*I.

EMERSON, ZEN BUDDHISM, AND NEO-CONFUCIANISM

Daisetz T. Suzuki, the Japanese Zen Buddhist scholar and teacher, throughhis numerous writings and lectures made a great contribution to introducing
Zen Buddhism to the Western world during the first half of the twentiethcentury. He confessed that he was deeply impressed with Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803–1882) in his college days, and his first publication was an essayon Emerson.1 Some Japanese and American scholars, greatly influenced by
Suzuki, have tried to find resemblances between Emersonian Transcendentalism and the Zen concept of “emptiness” (空 kū).2
However, Suzuki’s “emptiness” is somewhat different from the Indian
Buddhist idea of emptiness. According to the great Indian Mahāyāna Buddhist philosopher Nāgārjuna, emptiness is not a state of nonexistence as opposed to existence, but one of transcending the opposition between existence
and nonexistence, that is, it is an absolute or religious enlightenment. Suzuki’s concept of “emptiness,” as it merged with Chinese Taoism (Daoism) andJapanese Buddhism, can be thought of as being much closer to “nonbeing”(無 mu) or even to a state of “naturalness” (自然 jinen).3
It is true that in Suzuki’s writings such expressions are comparable toEmerson’s “God within” and “self-reliance”: “If you wish to seek the BudCopyright © 2009 Yoshio Takanashi. All rights reserved. This work may be used,with this notice included, for noncommercial purposes. No copies of this work may
be distributed, electronically or otherwise, in whole or in part, without permission
from the author.
*Professor, Nagano Prefectural College

113

114

YOSHIO TAKANASHI

dha, you ought to see into your own Nature; for this Nature is the Buddha
himself.”4 Both Suzuki’s Zen and Emerson’s Transcendentalism show an attitude of truth-seeking, of trying to find the profound spring of truth within
the inner soul apart from every outer traditional authority, institution, andform. However, there is a noteworthy difference between Suzuki’s “originalself” and Emerson’s “inner self.” Zen’s original self is revealed when a person utterly gives up attachment to anything. As long as one clings to something, one cannot enjoy the absolute state of freedom. On the other hand, in
Emerson’s thought, there is a concept of double-consciousness within humans, an outer self and an inner self. Humans can be in touch with the “eternal One” or the “universal soul” at the bottom of their inner selves. This ispossible only by overcoming the outer self through self-purification and selfdenial. It can, therefore, be said that Emerson’s self transcends its individuality and becomes united with a superpersonal “Over-soul,” while Suzuki’s self
dissolves into oneness with nature, abandoning its personality.
Moreover, Mahāyāna Buddhism, the core doctrine of which is “emptiness,” has a tendency to break off from human ethical and social duties andshow indifference to human values, while a noticeable characteristic of Emerson is the bearing of human moral and social responsibilities. Therefore,
the contention that there can be found much similarity between Buddhism
and Emersonian thought is quite problematic. It is true that Emerson read afew Buddhist books and was somewhat influenced by them, but he also wrote
in his journal: “[T]his remorseless Buddhism lies all around, threatening withdeath and night”5 and “The Indian system is full of fate, . . . it is the dread
reality, it is the cropping out in our planted gardens of the core of the world:
it is the abysmal Force untameable and immense.”6 These expressions showthat Emerson regarded Buddhism as a philosophy of dreadful and remorseless fate and that he thought negatively of the supreme perfect enlightenment(Nirvāna) that the Buddha attained. 7
In terms of the relation between Emerson’s thought and Asian religious
thought, many Emerson scholars have acknowledged the great influence Hinduism exerted on him. In the 1820s Emerson began reading Indian poetry andmythology. It is well known that his aunt Mary Moody Emerson, who hadmuch interest in Hinduism, inspired the young Emerson. In 1845 he read the
Bhagavad-Gita, one of the most important Sanskrit scriptures. Emerson’s“Over-soul” can be compared to Brahman in Upanishad philosophy as expressed in the Gita. In his poems, such as “Hamatreya” and “Brahma,” andhis essays, such as “The Over-Soul,” “Fate,” and “Illusion,” there can certainly be found Hindu influences. The similarities have been pointed out be-

EMERSON AND ZHU XI

115

tween the Hindu doctrines of “karma,” “maya,” and “transmigration of thesoul” and the Emersonian concepts of “compensation,” “fate,” “illusion,” and“immortality.”
American scholars such as Frederic I. Carpenter, Arthur Christy, and Arthur Versluis have undertaken comprehensive studies of the influence of
Asian thought and religion on Emerson in their respective works—Emerson
and Asia, The Orient of American Transcendentalism, and American Transcendentalism and Asian Religions. In these they examine the influence on
Emerson not only of Hinduism but also of Chinese Confucian and Taoist
thought, such as that of Confucius (Kongzi 孔子), Mencius (Mengzi 孟子),
and Lao Tzu (Laozi 老子).8
My own comparative studies of Emerson’s thought and Neo-Confucianism
make it clear that Emerson can be understood as much closer to Neo-Confucianism, especially to the doctrines of Zhu Xi (Chu Hsi 朱熹 or 朱子, 1130–
1200), than to Hinduism, Buddhism, and Taoism.9 One likely reason Emerson was embraced with enthusiasm by Japanese readers of the late nineteenth
and early twentieth centuries may have been that they found marked similarities between his thought and Neo-Confucianism, a system of ideas andethical values in which Japanese culture had been steeped for several centuries.
Neo-Confucianism emerged in Song dynasty China (宋 960–1279) withthe support of a rising class of bureaucrats (士大夫). The teachings of NeoConfucianism preserved the human and social morality of Confucianism,
while criticizing Taoism for promoting natural idleness and Buddhism fordevaluating the human duties necessary to ordinary family life and social
relationships. At the same time, Neo-Confucianism borrowed elements of
Buddhist metaphysics and Taoist cosmogony in a new formulation of ethicalphilosophy that was clearly distinguished from Buddhism and Taoism.
In Emerson’s day, the Four Books (四書) : the Analects of Confucius 『論(() , the Great Learning 『大学』(
) , and the語』) , the Book of Mencius 『孟子』
Doctrine of the Mean, 『中庸』(
) might have been the only Confucian writings available in English translation. Emerson read a version of the Four
Books translated from original Chinese texts.10 The very fact that Emerson
read these texts, including Zhu Xi’s commentaries, demonstrates that he was
influenced by Zhu’s Neo-Confucian views, though he was almost certainly
not aware of it. Zhu Xi, the synthesizer of the philosophical system of NeoConfucianism, turned to the Confucian tradition and merged Neo-Confucian
ideas developed during the period of the Northern Song dynasty with elements of Buddhist and Taoist philosophy. Zhu valued the Four Books highly,

116

YOSHIO TAKANASHI

interpreted the Analects of Confucius in terms of his Neo-Confucian view ofhuman nature as fundamentally good, and revised some parts of the Great
Learning and the Doctrine of the Mean. His commentaries on the Four
Books formed the basis of civil service examinations in China from 1314–
1904, and have generally been regarded as his most important work.
The influence on Emerson of Confucian doctrines of the Four Books, including those of the mean, of the inborn goodness of human nature, of sincerity, and of the superiority of the human individual to the state, can be recognized in such essays as “Experience,” “Character,” “Manners,” and “Politics,”
which appeared in Essays: Second Series in 1844. Passages in his later
works, including Representative Men, English Traits, and The Conduct ofLife, also reveal the influence of the Four Books, albeit indirectly.11
It is worthwhile, therefore, to consider from a comparative viewpoint therelation between Emerson’s thought and Neo-Confucianism, especially Zhu
Xi’s philosophy. In this essay I closely examine, from four significant conceptual viewpoints, the affinities and differences between Emerson’s thought
and the doctrines of Zhu Xi.
II.

SCHOLARIn each cultural area in the world supreme value has been placed on its own
ideal image of a human being. People in each cultural area set a goal of how
character should be developed and how they can align themselves with theideal human being. In ancient Greece the ideal human being was a man of
wisdom who had intellectual faculties of seeing and recognizing Idea, a supposed eternally existing pattern or archetype of things; in Buddhism an awakened human being was one who penetrated a truth; and in Confucianism asage was one who had moral faculties of knowing tao (dao 道 the way) andjoining with it.
Zhu Xi, in his commentary on the first chapter of the Doctrine of the Mean,
focused on the statement “What Heaven has conferred is called nature.”12
From these writings he developed the idea of li (理 principle) in tian (天heaven) and called it tian li (天理 heavenly principle). Through the heavenly
principle the inborn goodness of human nature was given a fundamental anduniversal ground. It became clear that xing (性 nature) is immanent withinevery human heart as a decree by heaven. Zhu’s “nature” can be considered
to parallel Emerson’s “God within,” and Zhu’s “sage” (聖人) to parallel Emerson’s “genuine man.”
The first noteworthy parallel between Zhu Xi and Emerson is that both

EMERSON AND ZHU XI

117

held the view of the fundamental goodness of human nature. Neo-Confucianism, under the slogan that becoming a sage can be attained by learning, heldthat there is a chance for every man to realize the ideal state of the sage, andportrayed the human being as a “scholar” morally bound to make great efforts at learning and practicing the way of self-cultivation (修身). Emerson,
likewise, repudiated the orthodox Puritan doctrine that only Jesus Christ, as
the Son of God, is endowed with the special supernatural and mystical authority of the Savior. As a result, for Emerson Jesus was only a “mediator”
between God and humans and a great religious leader who realized the idealof human morality. Emerson’s “scholar” is a “genuine man” who, faithfully
following moral principle, seeks essential and universal human nature by giving up the superficial and selfish self. Thus a remarkable similarity between
Zhu Xi and Emerson can be found in that both philosophers place great importance on the role of a “scholar,” denying the divinity and sacredness ofConfucius or Jesus, and regard them instead as great teachers and embodiments of a human moral ideal.
The second parallel can be recognized in Zhu Xi’s “subduing one’s self
and returning to propriety” (克己復礼) and Emerson’s “self-reliance.” In
Neo-Confucianism, before “nature” as li is manifest in humanity as five cardinal virtues li keeps its own transcendent uncorrupted state, called the“original nature” (本然の性). When li is clouded and restrained through thedulling effects of qi (気 material force), it is called “physical nature” (気質の性). What human beings, therefore, should try to do is to overcome “physicalnature” and return to the “original nature” of heaven and earth (複初). This iscalled “transforming physical nature” (気質の変化), which means controllingand putting aside all selfish human desires and returning to propriety, theimpartial moral order of human society, and to the heavenly principle. For
Zhu, learning should be done by improving oneself so as to possess moral
principles in one’s own heart (自得) and to gain a feeling of deep inner contentment. As Mencius says: “The superior man lays the foundation in soundprinciples: wishing to possess them in himself.”13
Emerson, much influenced by the Unitarian doctrine of “self-culture,” developed it further in his original Transcendental idea of “self-reliance,”
preaching that one should bear responsibility for the spiritual and moral
growth of one’s own mind. For Emerson, moral conduct lies in returning to
one’s original self, as he put forward in his “Divinity School Address”: “Theman who renounces himself, comes to himself by so doing.”14 Zhu’s “returning to the original nature,” therefore, can be comparable to Emerson’s “returning to oneself.” Moreover, his idea of “self-reliance,” much like Zhu’s

118

YOSHIO TAKANASHI“subduing one’s self and returning to propriety,” entails incorporating oneself
with the universal Over-soul by trusting wholly in “God within,” which isinherent in an individual’s soul. As he writes in his essay “The Over-Soul”:“Behold, it saith, I am born into the great, the universal mind. I the imperfect,
adore my own Perfect.” (CW 2: 175).
There are differences in Emerson and Zhu Xi’s views as to what a “scholar” is. First, a clear difference can be found between the two philosophers’
views of the role of a “scholar” in society. In Neo-Confucianism a scholar’s
duties are “illustrating illustrious virtue” (明明徳) and “renewing people” (新民), also stated as “the cultivation of the self” (修己) and “the government of
the people” (治人). Here personal ethics and social and political ethics areclosely and inseparably connected. On the other hand, in Emerson’s “scholar,” there can be recognized serious conflicts between trusting one’s self andfollowing social moral standards, thus leading to opposition rather than harmony between inner personal ethics and outer social ethics.
For Zhu Xi “selfishness” (私) should be annihilated in favor of “impartiality” (公), but for Emerson, on the contrary, one is required to seek the “public” good while placing oneself as a citizen in the sphere of the “private.”
According to Emerson, the ultimate purpose of society is to realize the character of the individual.15 Emerson views democracy as an ideal system ofsocial organization, but it serves as but one means to attain this purpose. For
him consideration should be given to the inner human mind before society, as
he writes in his essay “Politics,” “To educate the wise man, the State exists;
and with the appearance of the wise man, the State expires. The appearanceof character makes the State unnecessary” (CW 3: 126). As mentioned earlier, in Zhu’s philosophy, there can be found harmony between individual ethics and social and political ethics. From this viewpoint, in spite of Zhu’s great
efforts to renovate a morally corrupted society, there remain conservative attitudes that maintain the existing society, and it may be difficult to criticize
and reform it in terms of the conceptions of a society with a more advanced
political system.
Second, Emerson’s concept of a “scholar” has much more diversity than
Zhu Xi’s. Zhu’s concept of a “scholar” is exclusively limited to a great sage
who embodies a human moral ideal. Emerson’s ideal man, on the contrary,includes even poets such as Shakespeare and Goethe, as well as religious
men, naturalists, and heroes. Emerson’s “scholar” has a remarkable tendency,
using the power of imagination, to create beauty and history.
Zhu Xi’s sage, as an image of ideal man, constantly examines whether heembodies a Confucian moral ideal. He is not required to love and express

EMERSON AND ZHU XI

119aesthetic truth, but to realize intellectual and moral truth and practice virtue.
Li, as an immutable moral value transcending time and space, exists, keeping
its perfect state innately within man, society, and nature. Li surely is the rootof generating all things in the cosmos, but it does not grow toward perfection.
This immutable state of li cannot be compared to the dynamism found in theEmersonian notion that God, or Spirit, or Law manifests and develops itself
as “Reason” and reaches completion through the human mind, nature, andhistory. Emerson’s “Reason” is not perfect, but has a process, tendency, andpower of evolving into perfection: “Truth never is, always is a-being” (JMN
4: 18).
III.

LANGUAGE

The basis of Zhu Xi’s philosophy, the idea that “nature is principle” (性即理), is most clearly evident in his doctrine of “the investigation of things andthe perfection of knowledge” (格物致知). Emerson’s Transcendentalism isrooted in the concept of analogy and “correspondence” between all things in
the universe and human minds. I shall make a comparative examination,
therefore, concerning “correspondence” and “the investigation of things andthe perfection of knowledge.” The first of the similarities between Emerson’s
thought and Zhu’s doctrines is that they are not based on such religious
creeds as the innate depravity of humankind and salvation by divine grace ofa transcendental absolute being. For both of them, it is the intellect, not religious faith, that is considered to be closely associated with virtue.
Second, Zhu’s doctrine of “the investigation of things and the perfection ofknowledge” comes from the assumption that for each thing there is a particular li. Li, as moral truth, is always found with qi, as a physical thing, and isnever separate from it. This is opposed to Buddhism, which completely denies the function of qi and emotions. Emerson likewise writes in his journal:“Ah! a fact is a great thing. The soul passed into Nature” (JMN 7: 14). Herea fact can be considered to be a physical thing having a figurative form. Emerson also tries to pursue moral truth and intellect within a particular physicalthing. There is, thus, a remarkable resemblance when Emerson and Zhu startfrom the examination of each physical thing, thus seeking the abstract anduniversal “Over-soul” and tai ji (太極 supreme ultimate).
What is the difference between Emerson’s “correspondence” and Zhu Xi’s“the investigation of things and the perfection of knowledge”? Since both are
related to language, it is necessary to compare their viewpoints on language.
A general account of the Confucian view on language starts with the fact that120

YOSHIO TAKANASHI

Confucianism is called “teachings about names” (名教). From ancient times
Confucianism has acknowledged the value of language and regarded the acquisition of its skill as one of the required items of virtue. In this point Confucianism greatly differs from Buddhism and Taoism, because these two
philosophies make the core of their doctrines “emptiness” and “nonbeing”
and have a negative view of language. It is, however, true that Confucianism,
while putting much importance on language, has some negative views on theuse of language. This is because words, as a means of expressing what is inside human hearts, should be associated with virtue and trustworthinessthrough moral conduct.16 Words, however, have a great power to influence.
As Confucius says in the Analects: “Fine words and an insinuating appearance are seldom associated with true virtue.”17 This leads to a tendency totaciturnity and prudence in speech: “The superior man is modest in his
speech, but exceeds in his actions.”18
Emerson believed that the correspondence between the human mind andnature can be accomplished through the intervention of symbolic language.
His theory of language is rooted in his symbolism. Humans are, therefore,
required to read by their inner eye the hidden symbolic language of nature inwhich God manifests Himself. Zhu Xi clearly sees learning through language
as important, since his doctrine of “the investigation of things and the perfection of knowledge” is centered on the study of the Confucian canonical classics. Zhu, though much influenced by the symbolism of the Book of Changes(『易経』) regarding the generation of all things,19 cannot be considered tohave developed a theory of symbolic poetry and language as Emerson did.
According to Zhu Xi’s philosophy, li is an abstract principle that unites thehuman heart with things, but language, as long as it is not the principle of allthings but a function of qi, cannot be considered to be identified with li. On
the other hand, according to Judeo-Christian doctrine, all things in the universe are created by God through his words. Emerson, though denying theorthodox Christian doctrine of creation, maintains the idea of creation
through words, and thinks of nature as a divine manifestation and a symbolic
language. In other words, language is one of God’s essential qualities. Thus,
there is a great difference in their view of language such that Emerson could
develop a theory of poetry rooted in his symbolism, while Zhu could not.
Emerson maintained that the corruption of language leads to the corruption of man: “The corruption of man is followed by the corruption of language” (CW 1: 20). He thought that the role of a poet is to see through thesymbolic language hidden in visible things and to unite language with thesethings. A poet, by the act of naming, liberates things and metamorphoses

EMERSON AND ZHU XI

121them into higher organic forms. This is the same as transforming visible andouter language into an acoustic and inner one, created words into creating
ones. As the apostle Paul wrote: “It is sown a natural body; it is raised a
spiritual body.”20 By the transformation and regeneration of language, theunity of human thought and the essence of things is recovered.
According to Emersonian theory, then, words come to be identified with
the indwelling essence within things. On the contrary, for Zhu Xi words
merely indicate the external aspects of things, not the essence itself. In Confucianism, heaven is speechless and does not reveal itself through words. As
Mencius says: “No, heaven did not speak; it merely revealed its will by actions and events.”21 Language is not a mediator between heaven and humans,
as it is in the Bible; therefore heaven and humans, having no dialogue, do nothave a vertical connection by way of words. Words are artificially provided
by the social horizontal relations between human beings, and no indwelling
relation between words and the essence of things can be found.
For Zhu Xi, when li comes to have a moral meaning, it is called a “name”(名). It can be said that when hidden li is changed into actual li by the humanconduct of “the investigation of things and the perfection of knowledge,” itcomes to be identical with its name.22 All myriad of things are required tohold the substance called the “share” (分) suitable to their names.23 Names,
therefore, inseparably related to each of their shares, are thought to realize
the moral meaning of the words on the basis of the standard of li (礼 propriety) by recovering the state of order in meaning. This can be called “rectifying names” (正名).24 Here, as discussed above, an essential difference between Emerson’s “giving names” and Zhu’s “rectifying names” can berecognized.
IV. THE WAY
Tao, having a wide range of meaning, has been one of the central concepts
in Chinese thought from antiquity. Tao, originally meaning the road along
which many people walk, gradually came to have a meaning of the moral
standard people should follow in ordinary social life. Moreover, such metaphysical meanings as the principle of the universe and the cause of generating
all things were included in the meaning of Tao. Zhu Xi conceives the discovery of the principle of the cosmos as “the way of Heaven,” and the pursuit of
the human moral standard as “the way of Men.”25 Emerson likewise tried toformulate human ethics based on a sense of duty of the human individual.
Thus, he came to view religion not as a system of doctrines of faith but rather

122

YOSHIO TAKANASHI

as “a theory of human life,”26 that is, an ethics consisting of moral and worldly teachings on the conduct of life. Therefore, a comparison of Emerson’s“conduct of life” and Zhu’s Tao will follow.
The first parallel between Emerson and Zhu Xi can be seen in their placing
human ethics at the foundation of the universe and nature. Both thinkers tried
to formulate systems of philosophy that can be applied both to transcendental
metaphysics and human morality and ethics. Both Emerson’s “Nature” andZhu’s “Heaven and Earth” are considered the origin of human moral standard
and to exert continual influence on human beings. For Zhu, the moral principle, that is “sincerity” (誠), everlastingly pervades the entire universe: “In
the realm of heaven and earth it is this moral principle alone that flows everywhere.”27 For Emerson as well, nature is God’s perpetual manifestation, andthe ultimate purpose of nature lies in the moral influence it exerts on humanbeings by inviting them to awaken to “Reason.” As he writes in his book Nature, “The moral law lies at the centre of nature and radiates to thecircumstance. . . . The moral influence of nature upon every individual is thatamount of truth which illustrates to him” (CW 1: 26). Emerson’s “Nature,”thus, is directly related to God’s “revelation,” and Zhu’s Tao, to “the transforming and nourishing powers of Heaven and Earth” (天地の化育). Both canbe regarded as the principles of life in the continual generation of all things.
The second resemblance is that both philosophers present a human-centered ethics in this world. Emerson denied the Calvinist belief in life after
death, and Zhu denied the Buddhist doctrine of transmigration of souls. Furthermore, for Emerson and Zhu, death is conceived from a rational and natural viewpoint as merely a transition from life, having no special determinantmeaning. In their thinking, there is no idea of depravity, sin, salvation, andresurrection. Emerson teaches that there is no Last Judgment of God in whichpeople are sentenced to eternity in heaven or hell. Zhu preaches that humans
are not judged by how their souls are transmigrated into the next world as areward in accordance with their good or evil deeds in this world. Both ofthem, taking affirmative views of life, attach importance to enriching life inthis world rather than to facing death.
The third resemblance, related to the second, is that both Emerson and Zhu
Xi developed doctrines of reward, not in another world, but in this one. Emerson, though denying the doctrines of the Last Judgment and justification byfaith, developed a theory of compensation that “a man is made the Providence to himself” (CW 1: 78). Zhu, though rejecting the doctrine of transmigration of souls, still kept the Confucian doctrine of reward that heaven gives
blessings to good and calamities to evil. There can be found a remarkableEMERSON AND ZHU XI

123

tendency in their doctrines to acknowledge the interrelation between naturallaw and ethical law, and to place trust in these laws’ functions to maintainmoral order by the powers originally inherent within humans and all things in
the universe. Both Emerson’s theory of compensation and Zhu’s theory of
yin-yang (陰陽) are successful in explaining such powers for an autonomous
maintenance of order.
However, there are differences between Emerson’s theory of compensation and polarity and Zhu’s theory of the yin-yang, although both assert thattwo powers, based on a dialectical principle of movement, conflict with eachother in both nature and human ethics. In Emerson’s polarity, the two poles,
while opposing each other, have a tendency to develop to a higher state andeventually to achieve unity and harmony by overcoming the opposition
through “metamorphosis.” Here can be seen movements of self-overcoming
and self-denial through the struggle between two contradicting and opposing
powers. The result, therefore, from the opposing and overcoming in polarity
is “improvement” and “evolution” to a higher state through a spiral movement. Zhu’s yin-yang, on the contrary, involves two phases of movements
and energies of qi, and through its own continual coming and going operation, it either acts to transform into the yang (active cosmic force) or condenses into the yin (passive cosmic force). Moreover, the yin-yang does notoperate through opposition of yin and yang but by their complex interrelationship in which yang is contained in yin, and yin in yang. The yin-yang
principle aims at balance and harmony through its contradictions; it is rathera principle of assistance, interchange, transformation, and repetition than thatof opposition and struggle between things and phenomena.28 Thus, in theoperation of yin-yang, such Emersonian ideas as self-denial and self-overcoming cannot be found, since the two opposing and contradicting powers of
yin and yang rely on each other for their existence and operation.
The second difference concerns the problem of freedom. Emerson faced
the problem of freedom and fate throughout his life.29 Freedom is based on
the concept of individual free will given by God to human beings. Emerson,
although repudiating the doctrines of orthodox Christianity, still attributed
the essential significance of human existence to having freedom of will. Eachhuman mind as “a selecting principle” (CW 2: 84) is duty bound to aspire to
moral perfection, unceasingly challenged by “its choice between truth andrepose.”30 There is, indeed, no doctrine of the Last Judgment, but man is at
every moment judged by “God within.” As Emerson said in his “Divinity
School Address”: “Thus, of their own volition, souls proceed into heaven,into hell” (CW 1: 78).

124

YOSHIO TAKANASHIIn Zhu’s philosophy, on the other hand, there can be found willing andaspiring minds, but they, as long as they are dependent on qi, are considered
to be operating not from li but by qi, or by the cooperation of li and qi, nomatter how mysterious and ethereal their functioning may be. Moreover, thestate of mind a sage attains is the unification with heaven and earth and freedom from any restraint. This freedom (自由), however, has an implication
like the Buddhist and Taoist meaning of “at one’s pleasure” (自在) and is notlike Emerson’s freedom, which only an individual, wholly relying on his own
self and independent of others, can accomplish and enjoy.
V. PEACE
It can be said that both Emerson and Zhu Xi are philosophers who soughtpeace and harmony in ethics, not only for individuals, but also on a social andcosmic level. Therefore, I examine their views on peace.
The first similarity between Emerson and Zhu Xi is that both lived in anage of national crisis. Emerson maintained an attitude of being a transcendental observer who retreated from actual society, believing that a scholar’sessential duty was “the study and the communication of principles” (CW 1:
69). He, however, was greatly shocked by Massachusetts senator Daniel
Webster’s address in March 1850, in which he supported Henry Clay’s proposal of compromise to avoid the separation between the North and the Southby having the North accept the Fugitive Slave Law. After the compromise
passed, Emerson felt that the slavery issue had become a matter that weighedon the conscience of the people of the North. In the 1850s Emerson severely
criticized the law in his lectures and clearly expressed his support of the abolitionists and the Anti-Slavery Society.31 Thus Emerson, faced with the greatcrisis of separation and war, felt obliged to be positively active in the serious
problems of slavery.
Zhu Xi lived in an age of crisis for the Chinese empire. The Song dynasty
established its rule in 960, but it had much difficulty when faced with an invasion by the Khitans and Tanguts and lost its control over sixteen northern
prefectures. At the beginning of the twelfth century, the Jurchen tribes rose topower in Manchuria and established the empire of Chin (金). The Song tried
to defeat Khitan power in cooperation with the Chin, but the Chin extinguished the Khitan and occupied even the capital of the Song. The Song,
then, retreated to the south, moving the capital there in 1127, and then, after
making peace with the Chin in 1142, its control over China was limited to thearea south of the Huai River. Thus, in Zhu’s age the Chinese people wereEMERSON AND ZHU XI

125continually faced, by invasions from northern tribes, with problems of war
and peace.
Second, both Emerson and Zhu Xi were faced not only with political crises
but also with cultural and spiritual ones. American society in the days ofEmerson was undergoing a rapid change as a result of the industrial revolution, the transition from an agricultural society to a capitalistic urban one, andthe appearance of mass democracy. Puritanism was losing vigor in its religious doctrines, and the emerging middle-class was in need of a new ethicaland moral outlook. The Song period during which Zhu Xi lived was also
faced with cultural crises. The popularity of heretical Buddhist teachings,
particularly of Zen Buddhism, came to be so widespread that it seemed difficult, because of the decline of Tao, for Confucianists to maintain Chinese
cultural and moral tradition. In Zhu’s time the teachings of Zen Master Ta-hui(大慧) fascinated even the class of bureaucrats. For Zhu, the teaching of asudden spiritual awaking (頓悟) of Zen Buddhism seemed shallow. He
thought Zen gave up on human ethics and relationships and was not based onreality. He saw Zen as failing to extend knowledge through objective study,
no matter how much it had lofty philosophical principles and deep insights
into the human inner mind.
The third similarity is that both Emerson and Zhu Xi, thinking that the
moral and cultural improvement of people would reinvigorate a weakened
society, made great efforts in educational and cultural activities. Emerson,
after his resignation from the ministry, lectured extensively in various parts of
the United States, which had not yet developed a good national education
system. He preached new doctrines of ethics including self-reliance and continued exerting a strong spiritual influence. Zhu Xi also devoted his life to theeducation of his young followers. In 1175 he and Lu Zuqian (呂祖謙) compiled an introductory anthology of Neo-Confucianism, Reflections on Things
at Hand 『近思録』(), in which the teachings of such Neo-Confucianists as
Zhou Dunji (周敦頤), Zhang Zai (張載), Cheng Hao (程顥), and his brother
Cheng Yi (程頤) of the Northern Song dynasty were systematically gathered.
Furthermore, in 1178 he restored the White Deer Hollow Academy (白鹿洞書院), making it the center for the revival of Confucianism. In opposition to
the examination-oriented education of his time, he called for the return todisinterested study of the Confucian canons, insisting that “in ancient times,
men learned with a view to their own improvement. Nowadays, men learn
with a view to the approbation of others”32 and that true learning is to investigate li in things, cultivate one’s moral character, and extend one’s virtue toothers. Even during the difficult time in his later years, when he was driven

126

YOSHIO TAKANASHI

away from the court and his school was under bitter attack, he still continued
lecturing to the younger generation that gathered around him.33
The word “integrity” is a keyword in Emerson’s view of peace. He said in
his “Harvard Commemoration Speech” delivered in July 1865 soon after the
Civil War came to an end, “The war gave back integrity to this erring immoral nation.”34 He said in a sermon that the true reason why he resigned
from the ministry in October 1832 was that he likewise wished to maintainthe state of “integrity” in his inner heart.35 For him “integrity” meant “freedom from moral corruption,” and he was constant throughout his life in his
resolution to keep, first of all, his “integrity.”
Zhu Xi’s view of peace, on the other hand, is based on the concept of“equilibrium and harmony” (中和). This comes from the passage in the firstchapter of the Doctrine of the Mean: “Let the states of equilibrium and harmony exist in perfection, and a happy order will prevail throughout heavenand earth, and all things will be nourished and flourish.”36 According to Zhu,
in the human mind (zin 心) there are two states: “nature” (性) and “emotions”(情). In the state of “nature,” the human mind is in supreme equilibrium, quiescence, and impartiality, and there is no stirring of emotions (未発). On theother hand, when “nature” manifests itself by taking the form of qi (已発),there spring up to the human mind emotions such as joy, anger, worry, andterror. In the state of “harmony,” even when human mind comes into activity,
it does not deviate from the state of equilibrium because there are no excesses or insufficiencies in the stirring of emotions. The realization of theperfect state of equilibrium and harmony in the human mind, therefore, directly extends to that of moral harmony and order in human society andheaven and earth. By casting “cultivation of the self” as the “root” and “government of the people” as the “branch” of the same tree, Zhu tried to extend
both eventually to “bringing peace throughout the world” (平天下). Zhu also
clearly expressed his opinions in his written reports presented to the emperor,
advising him to make his thoughts sincere (誠意), to rectify his mind (正心),to take men of ability into government service, to maintain public law andorder, and to encourage good popular morals.
Peace and nonresistance were doubtless ideals for Emerson, as is shown by
his opposition to the U.S.-Mexican War. The reason, however, why he eventually approved the use of force against the South was that he believed theprinciple of liberty and the original American spirit won by the War of Independence would be expanded to the black race and every part of the republic.
The most important thing for him was the realization of goodness and truth:“My creed is very simple, that Goodness is the only Reality.”37 He was confi-

EMERSON AND ZHU XI

127

dent that Providence would manifest itself, transcending the value of goodness and evil, and that even a war, destroying the existing social system by
the realization of goodness hidden in its evil appearance, would help restore
a state of “integrity.”
He felt much sympathy with John Brown, who tried to overthrow slavery,and said in his speechs that Brown was a national hero who, through anarmed uprising, sacrificed his life for the cause of freedom.38 He also remarked at a memorial service held in Concord in April 1865 immediately
after Abraham Lincoln was assassinated that Lincoln was a heroic deliverer
who overcame the great crisis of the nation, and that his inauguration aspresident and his tragic death were wrought by a serene Providence. 39
It is indeed true that following moral principle was the first consideration
for both Emerson and Zhu Xi, and they didn’t approve of settling matters byusing armed force. Both of them, on the other hand, were against keeping
peace by making easy compromises. Zhu, against making peace with theChin, insisted on the Chinese holding their ground even by force whilestrengthening domestic administration.
In spite of such resemblances as stated above, there is a fundamental difference between Emerson’s and Zhu Xi’s views of peace. For Zhu “equilibrium” means a perfect state of supreme moral goodness, and “bringing peace
throughout the world” will be finally realized by letting the state of equilibrium and harmony exist in perfection with complete virtue manifesting itself.
For Emerson, on the other hand, “peace” is not a static state of keeping a
tranquil and happy harmony but a dynamic process of evolution proceeding
toward a more complete unity of the cosmic mind and realization of justiceand goodness.
In this article I have made a comparative examination of Emerson’s
thought and Zhu Xi’s Neo-Confucian ideas from the point of view of thescholar, language, the Tao, and peace. It is clear that there is much affinity intheir philosophies despite their having lived in different cultures and ages. At
the same time, it should be noted that fundamental differences can also berecognized in their thinking.
NOTES
An overview of this article was presented at the panel “Emerson’s Representations of Asia,
Asia’s Representations of Emerson,” sponsored by the Ralph Waldo Emerson Society at the
Nineteenth Annual American Literature Association Conference held in San Francisco, California, May 2008. I would like to thank the American Studies Foundation of Japan for a travel
grant that supported my presentation.

128

YOSHIO TAKANASHI

1Regarding Emerson and Daisetz T. Suzuki (鈴木大拙, 1870–1966), see Daisetz Suzuki,
Zen and Japanese Culture (New York: Princeton University Press, 1959) , 343–44; “Emason
no Zen-gaku-ron” [Emerson’s view of Zen], Suzuki Daisetz Zenshyū [The complete writings ofDaisetz Suzuki] (Tokyo: Iwanami-shoten, 1971), supplementary vol. 1, 17–25; and Lawrence
Buell, Emerson (Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2003), 196–97.
2
For studies of the influence of Buddhism, particularly Zen Buddhism, on Emerson’s
thought, see Yahagi Kodō, “R. W. Emerson ni Oyoboshita Tōyō-shisō no Eikyō nitsuite” [Onthe influence of Eastern thought on R. W. Emerson], Hikaku-shisō [Comparative thought] 2(1965), 1–13; “R. W. Emerson no Shizen-kan to Tōyō no Shizen-kan” [R. W. Emerson’s viewof nature and Eastern views of nature], Taishō- daigaku Kenkyū-kiyō [Journal of Taishō University] 52 (1967), 1–15; Amerika Runessansu no Kenkyū: Konkōdo Gurūpu to Tōyō-shisō [Astudy of the American Renaissance: The Concord Group and Eastern thought] (Tokyo:
Mogamigawa-shobō, 1969)；Shōei Andō, Zen and American Transcendentalism: An Investigation of One’s Self (Tokyo: Hokuseidō Press, 1970), 136–46; Van Meter Ames, Zen andAmerican Thought (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1962), trans. Yūji Nakata (Tokyo:Ōshisha, 1995); and John G. Rudy, Emerson and Zen Buddhism (Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen
Press, 2001).
3
For the concept of “emptiness” of Indian Mahāyāna Buddhism, see Hajime Nakamura,
Ryūju [龍樹 Nāgārjuna, ca.150–250] (Tokyo: Kōdansha, 2002), 231–84; and concerning theinfluence of the Taoist concept of “nonbeing” on Chinese and Japanese Zen and Jōdo Buddhism, see Mikisaburō Mori, Rōshi・Sōshi [Lao Tzu and Chuang Tzu] (Tokyo: Kōdansha,
1994), 389–442.
4
Daisetz T. Suzuki, Essays in Zen Buddhism: First Series (London: Rider and Company,
1949), 233.
5The Journals of Ralph Waldo Emerson, ed. Edward Waldo Emerson and Waldo Emerson
Forbes, 10 vols. (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1909–14), vol. 6, 318, dated Dec. 1842.
6
The Journals and Miscellaneous Notebooks of Ralph Waldo Emerson, ed. William H. Gilman, Ralph H. Orth, et al., 16 vols. (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1960–82), vol. 9,313, dated Oct. 27, 1845; hereafter cited parenthetically in text as JMN.
7
See Frederic I. Carpenter, Emerson and Asia (Cambridge: Harvard University Press,
1930), 146–50.
8Regarding Emerson and Asian thought and religions, see Carpenter, Emerson and Asia;
Arthur Christy, The Orient in American Transcendentalism: A Study of Emerson, Thoreau,and Alcott (New York: Octagon Books, 1963), 61–183; Arthur Versluis, American Transcendentalism and Asian Religions (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993), 51–79; Shanta
Acharya, The Influence of Indian Thought on Ralph Waldo Emerson (Lewiston, NY : Edwin
Mellen Press, 2001)；and Shoji Goto, The Philosophy of Emerson and Thoreau: Orientals
Meet Occidentals (Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen Press, 2007). These five authors make nomention of Neo-Confucianism.
9
See Yoshio Takanashi, “Emerson, Japan, and Neo-Confucianism,” ESQ: A Journal of theAmerican Renaissance 48 (2002): 41–69; and “A Comparative Study of R. W. Emerson’s
Thought and Neo-Confucian Doctrines,” a report of the research project subsidized by theJapan Society for the Promotion of Science, Apr. 2005-Mar. 2008.
10
Emerson first became acquainted with Chinese philosophy and ethics in 1830 throughGérando’s encyclopedia. Then, in 1836, Joshua Marshman’s translation of the Analects ofConfucius came into his hands, and during the summer of 1843, he read all of the Four Books
in David Collie’s translation. Finally, in 1863, he read the Analects of Confucius, the Great
Learning, and the Doctrine of the Mean in James Legge’s translation.
11
See Robert E. Bundy, “Some Traces of the Influence of the Four Books of the ChineseClassics on the Writings of Ralph Waldo Emerson” (MA thesis, Columbia University, 1926);

EMERSON AND ZHU XI

129

Carpenter, Emerson and Asia, 232–46; and Christy, Orient in American Transcendentalism,
131–37.
12
Confucius: Confucian Analects, The Great Learning, and The Doctrine of the Mean,trans. James Legge (New York: Dover, 1971), 383.
13
“Memoirs of Mencius,” chap. 8, The Chinese Classical Work Commonly Called The Four
Books, 2 vols., trans. David Collie (Malacca: Mission Press, 1828), vol. 2, 111.
14
The Collected Works of Ralph Waldo Emerson, ed. Alfred R. Ferguson, Joseph Slater,
Douglas Emory Wilson, et al., 7 vols. to date (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1971-),
vol. 1, 78; hereafter cited parenthetically in text as CW.
15Regarding Emerson’s view of the relation of an individual to society, see Gustaaf Van
Cromphout, Emerson’s Ethics (Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 1999), 101–7; andDavid M. Robinson, Apostle of Culture: Emerson as Preacher and Lecturer (Philadelphia:
University of Pennsylvania Press, 1982), 104–5, 141–44.
16
For the Confucianist view of language, see Michitaka Imahama, Jukyō to “Gengo”-kan[Confucianism and its view of “language”] (Tokyo: Kasama-shoin, 1978), 53–54.
17“Confucian Analects,” bk. 1, chap. 3, Legge, Confucius, 139.
18
Legge, bk. 14, chap. 29, 286. See Imahama, Jukyō to “Gengo”-kan, 11–97.
19
The derivation of the two forms, yin and yang, from the Supreme Ultimate, and theirfurther division into the four emblems and eight trigrams, is described in the Book of Changes,
in which the two forms represent the two kinds of lines, one divided, the other undivided, thecombinations of which form the trigrams and hexagrams. See Fung Yu-lan, A History of Chinese Philosophy, vol. 2, trans. Derk Bodde (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1953),
546.
20
CW, 1:19; and 1 Corinthians 15:44.
21“Memoirs of Mencius,” chap. 9, Collie, Chinese Classical Work, vol. 2, 124.
22
For the Confucianist view of names, see Mikio Ōmuro, Seimei to Kyōgen (狂言): Kodai
Chūgoku Chishiki-jin no Gengo-sekai [Rectifying names and farces : The world of languageof ancient Chinese intellectuals] (Tokyo: Serika-shobō, 1886), 44–46, 66–68; and Mikisaburō
Mori, “Na” to “Haji” no Bunka [The culture of “names” and “shame”] (Tokyo: Kōdansha,
2005), 13–54, 110–28.
23
For the Confucianist concept of “share,” see Chūgoku-shisō-bunka Jiten [The dictionaryof Chinese thought and culture] , ed. Yuzō Mizoguchi, Matsuyuki Maruyama, and Tomohisa
Ikeda (Tokyo: University of Tokyo Press, 2001), 246–53.
24“The Master replied, ‘What is necessary is to rectify names,’” “Confucian Analects,” bk.
13, chap. 3, Legge, Confucius, 263.
25
“Sincerity is the way of Heaven. The attainment of sincerity is the way of men,” “TheDoctrine of the Mean,” chap. 20, Legge, Confucius, 413.
26
The Complete Sermons of Ralph Waldo Emerson, ed. Albert J. von Frank et al., 4 vols.
(Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 1989–92), vol. 2, 88.
27
Learning to Be a Sage: Selections from the Conversations of Master Chu (『朱子語類』),
Arranged Topically, trans. Daniel K. Gardner (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1990),
125, chap. 9.
28
For the philosophy of the Changes, see Hikaku-shisō Jiten [The dictionary of comparative
thought], ed. Mineshima Hideo (Tokyo: Tokyo-shoseki, 2000), 487–88; and Takehiro Sueki,
Zōho-shinpan: Tōyō no Gōri-shisō [Eastern rationalism], new ed., rev. and enlarged (Kyoto:
Hōzōkan, 2001), 228–36.
29
See Stephen E. Whicher, Freedom and Fate: An Inner Life of Ralph Waldo Emerson(Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1953).
30
See CW, 2:202.
31
Regarding Emerson’s involvement with the slavery issue, see Marjory M. Moody, “The130

YOSHIO TAKANASHI

Evolution of Emerson as an Abolitionist,” American Literature 17 (Mar. 1945), 1–21; and Len
Gougeon, Virtue’s Hero: Emerson, Antislavery, and Reform (Athens: University of Georgia
Press, 1990).
32“Confucian Analects,” bk. 14, chap. 25, Legge, Confucius, 285.
33
Regarding the biography of Zhu Xi and the political and cultural history of his time, see
Gardner, Learning to be a Sage, 3–81; and Shushigaku Nyūmon [An introduction to the doctrines of the Zhu Xi school], ed. Morohashi Tetsuji, Yasuoka Masahiro, et al., vol. 1 of Shushigaku Taikei [The complete writings of the Zhu Xi school] (Tokyo: Meitoku Press, 1974),
31–65, 397–410.
34
The Complete Works of Ralph Waldo Emerson, ed. Edward Waldo Emerson, 12 vols.
(Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1903–4), vol. 11, 342; hereafter cited parenthetically in text as
W.
35
See Complete Sermons, 4:194.
36
Legge, Confucius, 385.
37
Edward Waldo Emerson, Emerson in Concord: A Memoir (Boston: Houghton Mifflin,1888), 254, dated Jul. 3, 1841.
38
See “John Brown,” speeches delivered in Boston on Nov. 18, 1859, and in Salem on Jan.
6, 1860 (W, 11: 265–81).
39
See, “Abraham Lincoln,” speeches delivered in Concord on Apr. 19, 1865 (W, 11: 327–
38).