George L. Israel

This bilingual, critically annotated edition of Wang Yangming’s Record of Instructions for Practice (Chuan xi lu 傳習錄) invites readers into the world of this transformative Ming dynasty Confucian master through his engaging dialogues and correspondence with disciples and colleagues. As one of the most inuential philosophical works in East Asia, the Record sets forth Wang’s distinctive teachings on the mind and conscience (liangzhi), and on the efort necessary to realize conscience in everyday life. This edition provides students and scholars with a reliable foundation for studying one of the most important Confucians in Chinese history

When the Ming dynasty Confucian Wang Yangming (1472-1529) proposed his tenet of the unity of knowing and acting (zhi xing heyi 知行合一), he did so because he believed that Zhu Xi (1130-1200), his revered Song dynasty predecessor and architect of the School of Principle (Neo-Confucianism), had wrongly conceptually divided knowledge and action, and that this had led to profound problems of an existential nature for the individual with real-world consequences. For Wang Yangming, the relation between knowledge and action is fundamentally one of identity, an identity grounded in the inherent, true condition of the vital being of the individual, in a unity of mind and body. He called this identity the original condition and original form of knowing and acting, explaining it in various ways. This article first explains how Wang Yangming positioned his tenet in relation to Zhu Xi’s conceptualization of the relation between knowledge and action, and then elucidates his conception of the unity of knowing and acting in four orientations, according to the different senses in which knowledge/knowing are understood: as perception, as awareness, as what is known, and as the innate knowing. (This is an abbreviated and edited translation of 論 ‘知行合一“的四重向度， 原载于《社会科学战线》2019年第2期).

In Doing Good and Ridding Evil in Ming China: The Political Career of Wang Yangming, George Israel offers an account of this influential Neo-Confucian philosopher’s official career and military campaigns. While his contribution to China’s intellectual history and the outlines of his political life are well known, the relation between his thought and what he did in his capacity as a Ming official has been given less attention. Prior writing on Wang Yangming has passed judgment on his ideas by either idealizing or condemning him for how he treated those he was assigned to govern. Through a detailed reconstruction of his career in the context of issues of empire, ethnicity, and violence, George Israel demonstrates that the truth lies somewhere in the middle.

Nie Bao 聶豹 (1487–1563) was a Neo-Confucian philosopher and scholar-official of sixteenthcentury Ming China. In his Ming ru xue an 明儒學案 (Case studies of Ming Confucians), Huang Zongxi 黃宗羲 placed him in the Jiangxi (Jiangyou 江右) group of Wang Yangming followers. Nie Bao met the influential founder of the Ming School of Mind in 1526 and was inspired by his teaching of the innate knowing (liangzhi 良知). However, he differed from other followers in his quietist approach to realizing and extending this knowledge. While developing his ideas over the course of two decades, as a holder of the highest civil service examination degree, Nie Bao also held a series of impactful official positions, and earned a reputation for effectiveness and integrity. However, he was also the unwitting victim of factionalism at the Ming court, which led to his imprisonment in 1548. The goal of this article is to provide a sketch of Nie Bao’s political trajectory and intellectual development from his early years until his imprisonment, as well as translation of significant passages pertaining to that trajectory and development. By the time of his imprisonment, Nie Bao had articulated the essential elements of his philosophy of returning to the root (by which he meant silence), and attaining centeredness and, with that, his unique interpretation of his teacher’s central tenet.

After being recalled to Beijing in 1510 for evaluation and reassignment in the wake of his two-year exile to Guizhou and his period of service as a magistrate, Wang Yangming was assigned to a succession of posts at the capital that kept him there through 1512. During that short time, he remained disillusioned with the Ming court and high politics and chose to put his energies into fostering a philosophical movement. He believed that by restoring the “way of master-disciple relations and friendship,” he could help propagate the learning of the sages. To that end, he held jiangxue gatherings with colleagues and friends and carried on an active correspondence. In those venues, Wang Yangming engaged others with his ideas about the goal of sagehood, the obstacles to attaining it, and the methods for overcoming those obstacles. The following article reconstructs this critical period in Wang Yangming's philosophical development and the intellectual movement he sought to foster, as well as the status of his philosophy as of this point in time.

Nie Bao 聶豹 (1487-1563) was a Neo-Confucian philosopher and scholar-official of sixteenth-century Ming China. In his Ming ru xue an 明儒學案 (Case studies of Ming Confucians), Huang Zongxi 黃宗羲placed him in the Jiangxi (Jiangyou 江右) group of Wang Yangming followers. The goal of this article is to provide a sketch of Nie Bao’s political trajectory and intellectual development from his early years until he was imprisoned in 1547, as well as translation of important documents pertaining to that trajectory and development. By the time of his imprisonment, Nie Bao had articulated the essential elements of his philosophy of realizing centeredness and returning to silence, and with that, his own unique interpretation of the meaning of the extension of the innate knowledge of the good. 第二十一届明史國際學術研討會 論文匯編 Proceedings of the Twenty-First International Conference of the Chinese Ming History Society

Wang Yangming (1472-1529) and his School of Mind dominated the intellectual world of sixteenth-century Ming China (1368-1644), and his Confucian philosophy has since remained an essential component of East Asian philosophical discourse. Yet, the volume of publications on him in the Western-language literature has consistently paled in comparison to the volume of scholarship on classical Chinese philosophy, modern Chinese philosophy, Buddhism, and Daoism. Studying Wang Yangming: History of a Sinological Field explains the history of writing in the West about the famed Ming dynasty scholar-official. From eighteenth-century French Jesuit books to English-language publications in 2020, this book provides a historical overview and summary of a literature published by scholars attempting to grapple with one of the most influential Confucians in the history of China, East Asia, and the world.

On the premise that the good knowing is the originary reality, this article provides a synopsis of Wang Yangming’s exposition of the fundamental essence of liangzhi. The self-existent resemblances of the originary reality are outlined and summarized as the eight virtues of liangzhi: voidness, intelligence, luminousness, awareness, constancy, happiness, true I, and purity. These eight virtues are, however, ultimately subsumed by the middle, which governs them in common. The middle is the original state and true form of the fundamental essence of liangzhi, which Wang Yangming describes as a transparent mirror and level balance.

Zhan Ruoshui 湛若水 is a prominent scholar-official and Confucian philosopher of Ming China. Like his contemporary Wang Yangming, he served in several official capacities during the reigns ofthree mid-Ming emperors, earned a reputation as an important Confucian teacher, gained a substantial following of students, and was critical to the onset of the jiangxue 講學 movement of the mid-Ming and the academy building associated with it. He also elaborated a sophisticated Confucian philosophy, leaving behind a corpus of work and a school of thought. In 1517, when he was fifty-one, Zhan Ruoshui left office and retired to Mount Xiqiao 西樵山 in Guangdong, where he constructed both a hermitage for his family and an academy for his students. He remained there for four years until he was recommended for reappointment to office in 1521. These years were critical not only for his having established his first academy and writing the regulations for operating it but also because he produced a substantial volume of philosophical writings that were foundational to his becoming recognized as a Confucian master and establishing his school of thought. This study provides an overview of the biographical and historical setting, Zhan’s pedagogy, and his philosophy at a time when this lesser-known Ming Confucian passed through a crucial stage in the development of his Way.

ABSTRACTStudents of Ming philosophy and the thought of Wang Yangming likely know that the 1960s–1970s was a period during which many scholarships in this field of study were produced in the English language. Indeed, it has been almost half a century since a group of scholars came together at the University of Hawaii to present papers on Wang Yangming in commemoration of the fifth centenary of his birth. That group included, for example, Wing-tsit Chan, David Nivison, and Du Weiming. These scholars, along with two others not present—Julia Ching and Carsun Chang—played a transformative role in introducing Wang Yangming to an English-reading audience. But, the history behind their achievement, as well as how they interpreted him for that audience, has yet to be written. This paper provides a synopsis of that history, explaining why the scholars chose to write about him and what they said about his life and ideas.

The revival of Confucianism in China since the Reform and Opening is a topic that has received much scholarly attention. Beginning in the 1980s, this revival has included the establishment of a multitude of research institutes and study societies; local, national, and international conferences and symposiums; the restoration of historical sites; the introduction of a Confucian curriculum into schools; and an increasingly voluminous scholarship.1 Reasons for the revival include government policy and the search for “a new source of ideological legitimacy for the state”; “a renewed academic interest” among intellectuals searching “for ways of dealing with China’s current social and political predicament”; the...