Wang Jinchi: On Zhang Zai's Transformation of the "Naturalistic" View of Ghosts and Spirits Since the Qin and Han Dynasties

Zhang Zai’s conception of ghosts and spirits ^[1] contains many "naturalistic" elements, leading him to be considered at one time a representative of ancient Chinese "materialism" and "atheism." Within Song-Ming Neo-Confucianism, however, "ghosts and spirits" (shénguǐ) are issues concerning the "substance of the Dao" (dàotǐ) ^[2]. Relying solely on a naturalistic perspective makes it difficult to perceive the full scope of Zhang Zai’s views or to provide an objective evaluation of his position in the history of the development of atheism. From the perspective of intellectual history, the naturalistic view of ghosts and spirits following the Qin and Han dynasties was a form of narrow atheism. Its primary significance lay in its critique of primitive concepts that viewed ghosts and spirits as concrete spirits or souls; it injected a rational character into the superstitious psychology of the time and acted as a corrective to the primitive religious forms of these beliefs. Yet, while providing this correction, it swung to another extreme, dissolving the inherent transcendent dimension of Chinese culture and appearing powerless to respond to the challenges posed by Buddhism. Zhang Zai’s conception of ghosts and spirits was developed precisely in response to these limitations of the post-Qin and Han naturalistic view, marking another turning point in the conception of ghosts and spirits.

I. The "Naturalistic" View of Ghosts and Spirits and Its Limitations

The concept of ghosts and spirits is extremely ancient, originating in the primitive worship born of the fear ancient ancestors felt toward unknown phenomena such as life and death. These ancestors believed that natural phenomena—the sun, moon, and stars in the sky; the mountains, plains, and rivers on the earth—all had rulers behind them. Those in the heaven were called shén (gods/spirits), those on the earth were called qí (spirits of the earth), while guǐ (ghosts) referred specifically to human beings, denoting the spirit or soul of a person after death, essentially a form of ancestor worship. The people of the Yin ^[3] believed that after death, the souls of ancestors ascended to heaven and could join the ranks of the gods; descendants could obtain the protection of these ancestors through sacrifice. Consequently, ghosts and spirits possessed a supernatural meaning. This primitive supernatural meaning was later gradually dissolved along with the continuous development of the theory of "the transformation of qi" (qìhuà). This line of thought can be traced back to the pre-Qin thinkers; the Zhuangzi, for instance, once defined "life and death" as the "aggregation and dispersal of qi." The theory of the transformation of qi truly "played a particularly important role in the Han dynasty," gradually forming a naturalistic view of ghosts and spirits among the literati class. This naturalistic view was also an early form of atheism in our country, characterized by two main features.

First, it regarded ghosts and spirits as qi. This was an answer to the question of the nature of ghosts and spirits. This expression had already appeared in documents from the Warring States period and the early Han. For example, the "Inner Training" (Nèiyè) chapter of the Guanzi states: "The essence of all things—this is what constitutes life. Below, it gives life to the five grains; above, it becomes the arrayed stars. When it flows between heaven and earth, it is called ghosts and spirits." The "Meaning of Sacrifices" (Jìyì) in the Book of Rites states: "Following the essence of things, and establishing for them a limit, they clearly mandated ghosts and spirits to serve as the common people ^[4], so that the multitudes would be in awe and the ten thousand people would be submissive." The "Xici I" (Appended Remarks) of the Classic of Changes states: "Refined qi (jīngqì) constitutes things, and the wandering soul constitutes change; therefore, we know the circumstances of ghosts and spirits." Generally, in the concept of a qi-based cosmology, all things in heaven and earth are transformed from a single qi, and there is nothing that transcends qi. Ghosts and spirits are merely a lighter, purer form of qi; thus, "ghosts and spirits" were often explained as "the essence of things" or "refined qi." The supernatural significance possessed by ghosts and spirits began to dissipate.

Second, it held that ghosts and spirits represent the meaning of "coming and going, contracting and expanding." This was an answer to the question of the function of ghosts and spirits. At that time, people had a highly rational explanation for the character for "ghost" (guǐ 鬼), using the homophone "return" (guī 归) to explain it, capturing the sense of "returning" or "reverting to the root." The "Meaning of Sacrifices" in the Book of Rites says: "All living things must die, and in dying they must return to the earth; this is called guǐ." The Shuowen Jiezi ^[5] also maintains: "Guǐ means that to which man returns... Shén means the heavenly spirits who lead out the ten thousand things." Later, Wang Chong provided a relatively complete expression in the Lunheng (Balanced Discourses), stating:

Guǐ means returning; shén refers to those things that are blurred and formless. Some say: ghosts and spirits are names for yin and yang. Yin qi turns things back and returns them, therefore it is called guǐ; yang qi guides things and gives them life, therefore it is called shén. Shén means expansion (shēn 申). Expanding and repeating without end, finishing and beginning anew.

It is evident that ghosts and spirits are not merely qi, but specifically the internal yin-yang structure of qi, through which all things in heaven and earth expand and repeat without end, finishing and beginning anew. Ghosts and spirits accomplish the movement of the expansion, contraction, coming, and going of qi; ghosts and spirits are the internal causes of the movement of qi.

Opposed to the naturalistic view of ghosts and spirits at that time, there was also a popular superstitious view which held that after a person dies, some kind of spirit or consciousness—namely a "ghost"—continues to exist. Wang Chong’s naturalistic view powerfully critiqued this theory of "humans becoming ghosts after death," stating: "I have now composed the chapters 'On Death' and 'Falsehoods About the Dead' to clarify that the dead have no consciousness and cannot become ghosts." He further reduced human spirit and consciousness to products of qi and physical form (xíng). He said:

Form requires qi to be completed, and qi requires form to have consciousness. There is no fire in the world that burns alone; how can there be an essence in the world that possesses consciousness alone without a body?

With qi as the material, the aggregation of qi forms the physical body, and only after the body exists is there consciousness. Thus was constructed a one-dimensional generative logic of "qi → form → consciousness." According to this logic, when a person dies and the form disperses to return to the primordial qi (yuánqì), consciousness no longer exists.

The further development of this "form-consciousness (spirit)" relationship was Fan Zhen’s "Treatise on the Extinction of the Soul" (Shénmiè lùn). Fan Zhen’s treatise is undoubtedly a landmark in the history of the development of atheism in ancient China. However, speaking objectively, the "spirit" (shén) that Fan Zhen critiqued referred to human "consciousness"; he viewed "spirit" as concrete perception or the soul, which belongs to a narrow form of atheism. His view of the form-spirit relationship had certain limitations. Fan Zhen stated:

Spirit is the form, and form is the spirit. Therefore, if the form exists, the spirit exists; if the form withers, the spirit is extinguished.

First, Fan Zhen’s expression was highly speculative; he did not sever or oppose "form" and "spirit," but believed that "spirit is the form, and form is the spirit." Form and spirit are simply two different functions and manifestations of the same existence; the two have "different names but one substance (tǐ)." Yet he also believed that "form" held the fundamental position, described as "form as substance, spirit as function" (xíngzhì shényòng). As he put it: "Form is the substance of the spirit; spirit is the function of the form. Thus 'form' designates its substance, and 'spirit' speaks of its function." Here, Fan Zhen replaced the "substance-function" (tǐ-yòng) relationship commonly used in Xuanxue (Dark Learning/Neo-Daoism) and Buddhism with a "material-function" (zhì-yòng) relationship. This is because tǐ (substance) carries a transcendent meaning, whereas zhì (material/matter) refers to the essence—the essential attribute by which one thing is distinguished from another at the level of reality. For instance, Fan Zhen believed the "material" of a human is "consciousness," while the "material" of wood is "unconsciousness." Being conscious or unconscious is a reality-based difference, and this difference reflects the different "material" of humans and wood. Furthermore, the difference between the "material" of humans and wood is, in the final analysis, the difference between the "forms" of humans and wood. In short, the "form" of a thing determines its "material essence," and simultaneously determines its "spiritual function."

Fan Zhen’s concept of "extinguishing the spirit by means of the form" was, in its original intent, issued to defend Confucian thought during the Southern Dynasties, when Buddhism was flourishing. He powerfully critiqued the theory of the "immortality of the soul" then prevalent in Buddhism and society. However, from a more professional perspective, Fan Zhen’s refutation of Buddhism was not actually successful. The "spirit" he critiqued referred only to human consciousness (awareness), fitting a narrow atheism. Although the "immortality of the soul" had a profound influence among the common people, it actually held little ground within Buddhist philosophy. From a Buddhist point of view, consciousness or the soul is merely a "deliberating mind" (sīlǜ xīn), a composite of the four aggregates (skandhas: sensation, perception, mental formations, and consciousness). Like the "form" (rūpa) composed of the four great elements (earth, water, fire, and wind), it lacks "self-nature" (svabhāva) and is therefore merely a "false self" (jiǎwǒ). The Buddha’s teaching was precisely to have people break their attachment to this "false self." Meanwhile, Buddhist concepts such as the fundamental consciousness (ālaya-vijñāna), suchness (tathātā), and Buddha-nature belong to the metaphysical, transcendent level. By using the extinction of concrete post-form perception or consciousness to negate "spirit" in its broad sense, Fan Zhen actually confused the distinction between the two. Therefore, he could not truly achieve the effect of refuting Buddhism, nor could he respond to Buddhist counter-arguments. For example, Zongmi ^[6] raised this doubt: "The qi of heaven and earth is originally without consciousness; if humans receive this unconscious qi, how can they suddenly (chū) ^[7] arise and have consciousness? Grass and trees also receive qi; why are they not conscious?" The word chū here refers to the idea of a sudden emergence of "being" from "non-being." Zongmi used this to launch an attack, implying his opposition to the theory of "something from nothing"—that is, the belief that human consciousness could not suddenly arise from nothingness, or from unconscious qi.

In terms of defending Confucianism, as Mr. Ding Weixiang has pointed out, "'spirit' is an inherent concept of Chinese philosophy," and we cannot entirely negate it simply because Buddhists use it. While Fan Zhen was "extinguishing the spirit by means of the form," he also negated the transcendent meaning that Confucianism could originally possess. This is directly manifested in Fan Zhen's conclusion on the "distinction between the ordinary and the sage." Following the logic of "form as substance, spirit as function," Fan Zhen believed that the reason for the distinction between ordinary people and sages lay fundamentally in the difference of their physical forms and materials. For example, [he cited legendary physical traits of sages]: "The eight-colored eyebrows and double pupils of Emperor Yao and Emperor Shun; the dragon countenance and horse mouth, the appearance of the peaks of the Yellow Emperor... the heart of Bi Gan with its seven apertures arrayed; the gallbladder of Jiang Boyue as large as a fist." Ultimately, "we know the sage is distinct, always exceeding the common category; not only does his Way transform the masses, but his physical form also transcends all things." In this way, sages are merely those who were born with "forms transcending all things"; ordinary people, due to the limitations of their physical form and material essence, cannot attain sagehood through "learning." This is precisely the great error criticized by Zhang Zai among scholars since the Qin and Han: "knowing man but not knowing Heaven, seeking to be a worthy but not seeking to be a sage." In Zhang Zai’s view, ordinary people and sages share the same nature; therefore, a sage can absolutely be formed through "learning." As the saying goes: "The Confucian, by means of clarity, attains sincerity, and by means of sincerity, attains clarity; thus Heaven and man are united as one, and through learning one can become a sage."

II. "The Title for the Wondrous Response of the Supreme Vacuity" and the Ontological Meaning of "Spirit"

Zhang Zai noticed the difference between "spirit" and concrete "perception" that follows physical form. This meant he had to transform the "form-spirit" relationship. In Zhang Zai's view, "having awareness and knowledge are merely 'guest-perceptions' resulting from the contact of things." What we generally call "having knowledge" is "derived from the reception of the ears and eyes"—that is, triggered by sensory stimuli; in the final analysis, "it is knowledge through the contact of things." This "knowledge" will be born and destroyed along with the aggregation and dispersal of qi; therefore, Zhang Zai called it "guest-perception." This point is consistent with Fan Zhen’s theory of the extinction of the soul: when qi disperses and the form withers, "perception" also vanishes. Furthermore, having knowledge implies having that which is not known; as Zhang Zai said, "to have that which is not known is to have knowledge; to have nothing that is not known is to have no knowledge." Thus, this "knowledge" is a form of limited "knowledge." In contrast, "spirit" possesses constancy; it does not undergo birth and death with the aggregation and dispersal of *qi"; Zhang Zai claimed that "ghosts and spirits are eternally undying." Secondly, "spirit" manifests as a form of infinite "knowledge." "To have no [limited] knowledge is to be spiritlike"; "The heavenly virtue of the sage’s position cannot be attained through [limited] knowledge—it is called spirit. Therefore, 'spirit' is the sagely that cannot be known." Thus, the "knowledge" of the "spirit" is the sage’s "non-knowledge" that knows all. In this way, "spirit" transcends "form," and further, in contrast to Fan Zhen’s placement of spirit in the position of "function," Zhang Zai endowed spirit with the status of "substance" (tǐ). Zhang Zai said:

That which is one thing with two bodies is qi; the "one" is therefore spirit (it is in two places and thus unfathomable), the "two" is therefore transformation (it pushes forward within the one); this is the way Heaven partakes as three. Spirit is heavenly virtue; transformation is the heavenly way. Virtue is the substance; the way is the function; they are unified in qi.

Spirit is heavenly virtue and serves as the substance of Heaven; transformation is the heavenly way and serves as the function of Heaven; thus, spirit is the substance and transformation is the function. The phrase "unified in qi" means that this spirit is the spirit of qi, and this transformation is also the transformation of qi. Zhang Zai advocated "first recognizing creation and transformation"—that is, starting from the world of phenomena and grasping the substance through the totality of the prevailing flow. The "two bodies" of qi are the relativity of the yin and yang of qi; the phenomenal world possesses motion because of this "duality" (that is, we see this relativity within movement and change, and establish the concepts of movement and change based on relativity), and it becomes a prevailing totality because of this movement. "Spirit" is the basis behind this "prevailing totality"; this is "seeing the substance through the function." The substance-function relationship indicates that there is no substance outside of function, nor is there function without substance. Although spirit transcends qi, it does not depart from qi; spirit is manifested in the ceaseless flow of the transformation of qi. Zhang Zai said: "The nature of qi is originally vacuous and spirit-like, thus spirit and nature are inherent to qi." Spirit is therefore internal to all things and serves as the original nature of all things. In this way, Zhang Zai endowed the "spirit-form" relationship with a brand-new "simultaneously transcendent and immanent" character. Consequently, this ontological "spirit" is different from both the immanent "spirit" of naturalism and a supernatural ruler.

"Spirit" in the ontological sense is connected to another important concept in Zhang Zai’s philosophy: "Supreme Vacuity" (Tàixū). The Supreme Vacuity is without form or image, perfectly still and without sensation; Zhang Zai used this to express the transcendent meaning of Heaven as being without sound or smell. Spirit, however, refers to the unfathomability of Heaven’s "wondrous response" (miàoyìng). "That which wondrously moves the ten thousand things is called spirit"; "The unfathomability of Heaven is called spirit, and spirit with constancy is called Heaven." Therefore, Zhang Zai believed that "spirit is the title for the wondrous response of the Supreme Vacuity." Spirit and Supreme Vacuity are different names for the same substance (Heaven). Furthermore, this unity indicates: Heaven is empty and silent but not non-existent; the utmost vacuity is the utmost reality. Therefore, the substance can manifest as ten thousand functions, ceaselessly generating life; this is the unity of substance and function at their source. This also meant drawing a clear line between his view and the Buddhist concepts of stubborn emptiness (wángkōng), extinction, and the severing of substance from function. Zhang Zai criticized:

If one claims that the myriad images are things seen within the Supreme Vacuity, then things and the Vacuity do not rely on each other. Form is naturally form, and nature is naturally nature; form and nature, Heaven and man, do not depend on each other for existence. This falls into the Buddhist theory that the mountains, rivers, and the great earth are all 'diseases of vision.' The reason this Dao is not clear is precisely because those who are ignorant only know that substance is vacuous and empty, and consider that to be nature; they do not know that the heavenly way is the basis for function, but instead use the small circumstances of human perception to account for Heaven and Earth.

The notion here that "the ten thousand phenomena [N1] are objects seen within the Great Vacuity" represents a specific "cosmology" of Buddhism—namely, "origination from the Suchness of Mind." In the theories of the Mahayana Nature Sect [N2], the "Suchness of Mind" is a transcendent and pure substance, neither arising nor ceasing. However, this transcendent True Mind does not directly generate the phenomenal world of birth and death. The realm of phenomena (the Gate of Birth and Death) and the realm of onto-substance (the Gate of Neither Arising nor Ceasing) are "neither one nor different." They are "not one" in that the Suchness of Mind cannot directly generate a world of birth and death; arising and ceasing are not the original nature of the Tathāgatagarbha (Buddha-nature). They are "not different" in that the world of birth and death is, after all, a world of provisional existence that relies upon the Suchness of Mind. In Zhang Zai's view, this leads to a transcendence where substance and function (本体-作用) are severed, and Heaven and Man do not interact. Consequently, the real world can only be founded upon illusion. In short, while completing his reconstruction of the relationship between form and spirit, Zhang Zai simultaneously completed his critique of Buddhism.

III. "Coming and Going, Contracting and Expanding" and the Functional Meaning of "Ghosts and Spirits"

Regarding "ghosts and spirits" (鬼神, guishen) as the essence of qi (精气) was the naturalist view of ghosts and spirits since the Qin and Han dynasties. However, Zhang Zai’s understanding of guishen had actually shifted along with his inversion of the relationship between "form and spirit." In Zhang’s philosophy, guishen cannot be viewed as qi in its factual, empirical state. He explicitly points out:

Ghosts and spirits are the "innate capacity" (liang neng) of the two qi [Yin and Yang]. To be a Sage is to attain Heaven through utmost sincerity (cheng); "Spirit" (shen) is the term for the subtle responsiveness of the Great Vacuity. All the laws and phenomena of Heaven and Earth are but the dregs of the operations of the Spirit.

The term "innate capacity" (liang neng) [N3] originates from Mencius, who said: "That which a person can do without learning is innate capacity; that which they know without reflection is innate knowledge." Both are inherent goodness that "proceeds from Heaven and is not tied to man." Zhang Zai further endowed "innate capacity" with ontological status (later, Wang Yangming would grant ontological status to "innate knowledge," establishing his doctrine of "extending the innate knowledge"). Zhang says:

The operations of the Spirit are the innate capacity of Heaven, not the capacity of man; therefore, only by being great and occupying Heavenly Virtue can one exhaust the Spirit and know its transformations.

That which is "Sage and unfathomable" is the innate capacity of Heavenly Virtue; if one seeks it with a calculating mind, one will never attain knowledge of it.

Heaven's innate capacity is originally my own innate capacity; it is only eclipsed by the presence of the "ego." (Clarifying that Heaven and Man are fundamentally not two).

It is evident that "innate capacity" is identical to "Heavenly Virtue" and occupies the "Sage" position. The third sentence, "Heaven's innate capacity is originally my own innate capacity," can be interpreted alongside the preceding line in the original text, "Heavenly nature resides in man." Wu Ne of the Ming Dynasty stated in his Supplements and Annotations to Correcting Ignorance (Zhengmeng buzhu): "'Heavenly nature resides in man,' therefore the innate capacity of Heaven is possessed by all people." The phrase "it is only eclipsed by the presence of the 'ego'" refers to how man's innate capacity for Heavenly Virtue is obscured by the "small self." In short, for Zhang Zai, "innate capacity" is the source of creation in Heaven and is man’s Heavenly Virtue or Heavenly nature (the Nature of Heaven and Earth) in man. Understanding this reveals that Heaven and Man are fundamentally not two. Clearly, in Zhang's thought, "innate capacity" and the "Nature of Heaven and Earth" possess the same ontological status and function. Therefore, the statement "Ghosts and spirits are the innate capacity of the two qi" actually means that guishen is the inherent nature of qi. This is further evidenced by this passage:

The nature of qi is fundamentally vacant yet spiritual (shen); thus, spirit and nature are inherent to qi. This is why ghosts and spirits "embody things and cannot be omitted." [N4]

The reason guishen can "embody things and cannot be omitted" is precisely because they are the inherent nature of qi. Furthermore, this sentence clearly explains that guishen is synonymous with "Spirit" (shen). Thus, while the expressions "ghosts and spirits" and "Spirit" differ in Zhang’s philosophy, the difference is by no means a distinction between "qi" and "spirit." We believe this expressive difference actually reflects two layers of consideration in Zhang’s philosophy: the "original" (inherent) and the "actual" (manifested). The original level pertains to the transcendence of the substance, while the actual level pertains to the inseparability of "substance and function" (ti-yong). Although substance and function are inseparable, the boundary between them cannot be obliterated. Therefore, we argue that in Zhang's philosophy, "Spirit" represents the ontological meaning of guishen, while "ghosts and spirits" embody the functional meaning of "Spirit." This functional meaning is presented through the "contracting and expanding, coming and going" of guishen, which is not identical to qi yet does not exist apart from qi.

Zhang Zai inherited much of the naturalist meaning regarding the contraction and expansion of ghosts and spirits. For instance, he says: "That which arrives is called shen (Spirit), for it expands (shen 伸); that which returns is called gui (Ghost), for it reverts." He also says: "Ghosts and spirits are the meaning of coming and going, contracting and expanding." However, in Zhang's view, this reflects the functional operation of the "Spirit." Guishen is not qi, yet is not separate from qi, nor is it the internal Yin-Yang structure of qi. First, guishen is not qi. In his commentary on the Xici [N5] passage "Refined qi forms things; the wandering soul brings about change," Zhang Zai provides an interpretation distinct from "naturalism":

Refined qi proceeds from nothingness to existence; the wandering soul proceeds from existence to nothingness. Proceeding from nothingness to existence is the disposition of shen (Spirit); proceeding from existence to nothingness is the disposition of gui (Ghost). Proceeding from nothingness to existence results in the manifestation of things; proceeding from existence to nothingness results in the concealment of change. That which manifests as a thing is the form of shen; that which conceals as change is the form of gui. The general idea does not exceed the bounds of existence and non-existence (you-wu). Although a thing is a reality, it fundamentally comes from vacancy; thus it is called shen. Change is the use of vacancy, but it is obtained through reality; thus it is called gui.

Here, "existence" and "non-existence" refer to the form-possessing and formless states of qi. The so-called "proceeding from nothingness to existence... manifesting as a thing" refers to the birth of objects through the condensation of qi; "proceeding from existence to nothingness... concealing as change" refers to the death of objects through the dispersion of qi. Zhang Zai believes that the beginning and end of the birth and death of things are never separate from the "vacancy" of their inherent nature. From vacancy to reality (fundamentally coming from vacancy) is the process of onto-substance manifesting as function; Zhang calls this shen. From reality back to vacancy is the process of "the form collapsing and returning to the origin"; Zhang calls this gui. In fact, guishen are simply different functions or designations for the "vacancy of inherent nature" during the process of a thing’s birth and death. The vacancy of inherent nature neither arises nor ceases, unlike the birth and death of qi condensation and dispersion; therefore, guishen do not arise or cease along with qi. Regarding the idea that guishen do not perpetually reside in death, Zhang says: "The Spirit of the Valley (gushen) [N6] never dies, thus it can manifest the subtle without being obscured." "Ghosts and spirits never die, thus Sincerity cannot be obscured." Here, "Spirit of the Valley" and "ghosts and spirits" are synonymous. The former, from an objective perspective, refers to the ceaseless transformation of the ten thousand things; the latter, from a subjective perspective, refers to the fact that the "Sincerity" of the fundamentally good human heart cannot be obscured. Regardless of whether objective or subjective, both take the eternal existence of guishen as the ground for ceaseless transformation. In short, guishen are no longer the "physical reality of refined qi"; this differs from the original meaning in the Yi Zhuan (Commentaries on the Book of Changes).

Second, guishen is not qi but is not separate from qi. This is evidenced by Zhang Zai's criticism of the Buddhists ("followers of the Buddha") who "speak of ghosts clearly" yet "wish to speak directly of the Great Vacuity." Zhang says:

...Generally, if one knows day and night, Yin and Yang, then one can [know] nature and destiny (xingming); if one knows nature and destiny, one can know the Sages and know ghosts and spirits. Those [Buddhists] who wish to speak directly of the Great Vacuity without allowing day and night or Yin and Yang to burden their minds have never begun to see the Changes. Having never seen the Changes, even if they wish to avoid the burden of Yin and Yang or day and night, they have no way to do so. If they cannot even see the Changes, how can they speak further of the Ultimate Reality (zhenji)! To abandon the Ultimate Reality and speak of ghosts and spirits is delusion. As for the so-called Reality (shiji), they can only speak of it; they have never understood it in their hearts.

Clearly, Zhang Zai here distinguishes "knowing day and night, Yin and Yang" from "knowing the Sages and ghosts and spirits" as different levels, yet they possess a unity. Through the effort of "exhausting principle and fully realizing one's nature" (knowing nature and destiny), "knowing day and night, Yin and Yang" leads directly to "knowing the Sages and ghosts and spirits." The error of the Buddhists lies in "not allowing day and night or Yin and Yang to burden their minds," which ultimately leads to "abandoning the Ultimate Reality and speaking of ghosts and spirits." In the Buddhist context, "Ultimate Reality" (zhenji) is "Reality" (shiji); Buddhism often uses "Truth" (zhen) and "Reality" (shi) to refer to the fundamental meaning. Zhang Zai believes that the Buddhist "Reality" holds a status equivalent to "Heavenly Virtue" or "Sincerity" in Confucianism. However, once Buddhism speaks of "substance," it treats human life as an illusion, whereas Confucianism "attains Heaven without ever abandoning Man"—substance and function are immediate to one another. Thus, Zhang Zai believes that "Ultimate Reality" should be the "unity of substance and function" (ti-yong yiyuan), which is "seeing the Changes." To "abandon Ultimate Reality and speak of ghosts and spirits" is to discard the principle of the "unity of substance and function" and to "wish to speak directly of the Great Vacuity." This is to grasp "ghosts and spirits" while omitting "Yin and Yang," leading to a severance between the two. Evidently, while Zhang Zai insists that guishen is not qi, he also opposes severing guishen from the qi of Yin and Yang. This echoes his proposition that "the Great Vacuity is identical to qi." It is clear that Zhang Zai is consistent throughout regarding this harmonious relationship between substance and function. This makes it easy to understand why Zhang also says the general meaning of ghosts and spirits "does not exceed the bounds of existence and non-existence," and "the reality of ghosts and spirits does not exceed these two ends." Because there are no ghosts and spirits without Yin and Yang, the moment we speak of "ghosts and spirits," it implies we are speaking from the level of actual existence.

IV. "Establishing Teachings through the Way of the Gods" and the Eradication of "Demons and Monsters"

In the realm of practice, the concept of ghosts and spirits manifests as "sacrificial rites" (jisi), a major tradition preserved since the inception of the concept of guishen. The "Meaning of Sacrifices" (Jiyi) chapter of the Book of Rites explains the purpose and significance of sacrifices through the voice of Confucius: "To combine the gui and the shen is the height of teaching... Based on the essence of things, regulations were established as the ultimate standard, and ghosts and spirits were clearly addressed as a model for the 'black-haired people' (the commoners), so that the masses would be in awe and the myriad people would be submissive. But the Sages deemed this insufficient, so they built palaces and established ancestral shires to distinguish between the close and the distant, teaching the people to return to the ancient and revert to the beginning, not forgetting that from which they were born. The submission of the masses follows from this, thus they are obedient and swift..." This is to endow guishen with an educational/civilizing significance through sacrifice. Zhang Zai, in the "Sacrifices" chapter of his Repository of Principles in the Study of the Classics (Jingxue liqu), provides a similar explanation: "Sacrifices connect with ghosts and spirits, unite the clan, distribute virtue and kindness, and implement teaching. For these to be complete, preparation is necessary, so that at the proper time one receives blessings." However, Zhang Zai's understanding of "establishing teachings through the Way of the Gods" (shendao shejiao) is based on his new conception of ghosts and spirits. He says:

Where there are "two," there must be resonance (gan); yet in the resonance of Heaven, what thinking or reflection is there? It is nothing but spontaneity (ziran). The Sages are able to "use resonance." What does "using resonance" mean? All implementations of teaching and civilization are the use of resonance. That which is initiated here and transforms there is the Way of Resonance; this is what is meant by the Sages "establishing teachings through the Way of the Gods."

Here, the existence of "two" (differentiation) is grounded in "Heaven's resonance." "Two" implies "transformation" (hua). "Heaven's resonance" is without thought or calculation; it is the "Spirit" (shen) of Heaven. The Sages "establishing teachings through the Way of the Gods" means they establish teachings according to this principle of the spontaneous generation of the creative process—this is the so-called "using resonance." Conversely, the significance of the people sacrificing to the gods of the soil and grain, the five sacrifices, and the myriad spirits lies in "repaying the Virtue of Heaven through the achievements of the myriad spirits." "Heaven's Virtue" is the virtue of the generation and transformation of ghosts and spirits. Thus Zhang says: "Serving ghosts and spirits as one serves Heaven is the ultimate service and the perfection of principle."

Traditional sacrificial activities, though religious rituals, contained no lack of blind following and superstition, yet they also possessed an undeniable sacredness. This sacredness is what Confucians call the "impossibility of obscuring Sincerity"; "Sincerity" leads directly to the Way of Heaven. This is a pursuit of transcendence inherent to humanity. Feng Youlan said: "The pursuit of that which transcends the mundane world is one of the innate desires of mankind." Zhang Zai’s "discourse on ghosts and spirits" aims, first, to highlight this sacredness in sacrifice and, second, to eradicate blind following and superstition. Regarding the first point, as previously explained, Zhang Zai overturned the naturalist view of ghosts and spirits since the Qin and Han and restored their transcendent dimension from a philosophical perspective, granting "Spirit" ontological status. Therefore, Zhang Zai believed that during sacrifice, one is not sacrificing to a specific, named, and imaged ghost or spirit, but rather to the infinite Spirit of the Great Vacuity and its meaning of coming and going, contracting and expanding. Zhang says:

Ghosts and spirits are the meaning of coming and going, contracting and expanding. Thus, Heaven is called Shen (Spirit), Earth is called Qi (Spirit of the Earth), and Man is called Gui (Ghost). (The spirits of Heaven and Earth represent the beginning of the return; the returning dead represent the end of the coming).

In Zhang Zai’s view, ghosts and spirits "embody things and cannot be omitted"; nothing in the universe is not the result of their contraction and expansion. The terms "shen, qi, and gui" are merely different names for the same guishen in different sacrificial contexts: shen when sacrificing to Heaven, qi when sacrificing to Earth, and gui when sacrificing to ancestors. Based on this concept, Zhang Zai opposed creating human-like statues for the gods of mountains and rivers:

The sacrifices to mountains and rivers are simply because they are thus towering and high, abyssal and deep, and their mists and moisture are sufficient to raise clouds and bring rain. They must be repaid, so they are sacrificed to as if they were the three dukes or feudal lords. How could there ever be such human images! The Sages, in governing, must remove them.

That is to say, the divinity of mountains and rivers is manifested in their being "towering and high, abyssal and deep" and their ability to bring rain and benefit humanity, rather than in being personified. Personification is superstition and blind following. Similarly, regarding the provision of offerings to ancestors, Zhang Zai did not emphasize the number of temples or altars or the distinction of ranks. He says:

As for "ghosts," it is simply that ghosts enjoy the offerings; yet this is not what the Classic of Filial Piety means by "ghosts enjoying offerings." When we speak of "ghosts enjoying offerings" here, it does not depend on the number of temples or altars; it is simply sacrificing to all the ancestors of previous generations together. There is no further distinction of rank; they simply share in one offering. This is merely a matter of "cherishing the spirit." "Ghosts" are simply those who have returned to the Great Vacuity, so they are sacrificed to collectively.

Though the individual has birth and death, the Great Vacuity of their inherent nature does not perish; this is the meaning of "ghosts are simply those who have returned to the Great Vacuity." Since all things in Heaven and Earth share the same inherent nature of the Great Vacuity, the spirit of the ancestors is the same as our own spirit. Therefore, the "enjoyment of offerings" in sacrifice is actually a "collective enjoyment" (qixiang). The number of temples and altars or the distinction of ranks may have practical social significance, but they have no philosophical basis. The fundamental meaning of sacrifice lies in the resonance of the spirit—resonating with our ancestors and even with Heaven and Earth through our shared nature of the Great Vacuity. This "nature" is also the principle of spontaneous generation in creation. The Sages "establishing teachings through the Way of the Gods" is nothing more than following this principle of creative generation. "Heaven does not speak, yet the four seasons proceed; the Sages establish teachings through the Way of the Gods, and the world submits." By following this principle of creation and allowing it to manifest naturally, the world will submit.

At that time, there was another highly superstitious interpretation of "ghosts and spirits" in society—the theory of "demons and monsters" (shenjian wuguai) [N7]. Zhang Zai refuted this, saying:

Fan Xunzhi once spoke of malevolent spirits and monstrous anomalies ^[15], to which Zhang Zai replied with an argument: "The thunder, lightning, flora, and fauna of heaven and earth are the pinnacle of the strange; yet because they have a fixed form, they are not considered anomalies. Man’s smelting, pottery, boat-making, and carriage-building are also the pinnacle of the strange; yet because they have a fixed principle, they are not considered anomalies. Now, those who speak of ghosts say their forms cannot be seen, or that those who do see them find them inconsistent—this is the first reason they are hard to believe. Furthermore, they claim that what is formless can move or transform objects with form; this cannot be deduced by logic—this is the second reason they are hard to believe. I have also reflected that while man cannot replicate the thunder, lightning, flora, and fauna of heaven and earth, heaven and earth likewise cannot replicate man’s smelting, pottery, boats, or carriages. Current talk of ghosts and spirits attributes to them a formlessness like that of heaven and earth, yet describes their actions as no different from those of men. Could it be said that the ghosts of the dead actually possess the combined capacities of both Heaven and Man? Let us further evaluate this by secular claims: If the dead retain consciousness, then when a compassionate mother who deeply loves her son passes away, why does she not daily possess people’s speech or entrust herself to his dreams to look after him? If it is said they can bless the virtuous and bring calamity upon the licentious ^[16], then why do we see countless instances where minor evils meet heavy punishment while great villains enjoy vast fortunes? Moreover, it is said that 'the spirits of the brilliant can become formidable wraiths.' If so, why did the First Emperor of Qin not punish Zhao Gao, and why did Emperor Taizong of Tang not penalize Empress Wu?"

Zhang Zai summarized several characteristics of these "malevolent spirits and monstrous anomalies." First, such things are formless and invisible yet can move or act upon physical objects. Zhang Zai believed this was actually an artificial construct, processed by using the "formless" concept of heaven and earth combined with the "active" image of human beings; because it lacks a fixed form and a fixed principle, it is untrustworthy. Second, such things are purportedly conscious and able to reward good or punish evil. Zhang Zai rebutted this with facts: a deceased mother cannot provide care through dreams, the First Emperor did not punish Zhao Gao ^[17], and Emperor Taizong did not penalize Empress Wu ^[18]. Furthermore, Zhang Zai proposed a criterion for judging "monstrous anomalies" (wu guai):

"As for monstrous anomalies, if the masses see them, then they are a matter of principle and the spirit-mechanism ^[19]; if only a few see them, it is either illness or fraud. How can a single object be invisible to some and visible to others? Those who see them in isolation are ill; when the human heart-mind is ill, the ears and eyes are likewise ill. Now, the brightness of the sun and moon is the spirit-mechanism—who does not see it? Or take the meteorite fall in the State of Song ^[20]: it was something previously absent that suddenly appeared, clearly seen by everyone on the ground; this is principle."

This establishes "collective perception" versus "isolated perception" as the standard of judgment. Zhang Zai argued that strange phenomena do exist in reality, such as the meteorite in Song, but these are facts witnessed by all, much like the "brightness of the sun and moon." "What is collectively seen and heard, though highly unusual, is sincere and emerges from the correctness of yin and yang." Zhang Zai believed that if one understands such special phenomena arise from the "correctness of yin and yang," one realizes they accord with the principles of the creative transformation of nature (zaohua), and thus there is nothing to be surprised about. Conversely, those things heard or seen only by individuals are either hallucinations caused by illness or outright fabrications.

V. Conclusion

Zhang Zai advocated for "first knowing the creative transformation of nature," which means taking the established phenomenal world as the foundation of cognition. Therefore, compared to other Neo-Confucians, Zhang Zai’s philosophy contains more "naturalistic" components. It is precisely through the totality of the flow of "qi-transformation" (qihua) that Zhang Zai grasped the ontological meaning of "spirit" (shen); this is the intent of "perceiving the substance through its function." Through this, Zhang Zai inverted the "form-spirit" relationship found in traditional naturalism. However, while there is no substance (ti) apart from function (yong), divinity does not manifest as a power transcending all things, but rather in the infinite transformations of all things themselves. Ghosts and spirits are not qi, yet they are not separate from qi; the "meaning of the coming and going, contracting and expanding" of ghosts and spirits refers to the different functions or designations of the spirit of the Great Vacuity (taixu) during the birth and death of things.

Although Zhang Zai criticized heterodox theories of "malevolent spirits and monstrous anomalies," he was not a thoroughgoing atheist. While restoring the ontological status of "spirit," he also endowed the concept of "establishing teachings through the Way of the gods" (shendao shejiao) with a broader theoretical dimension. Sages established teachings through the Way of the gods based on the principle that the creative transformation of nature continuously generates life. The fundamental significance of sacrificial rites lies in "spiritual resonance" (gantong)—resonant communication between ourselves and our ancestors, and even with heaven and earth, as we all share the same essential nature of the Great Vacuity.

In short, Zhang Zai’s transformation of the naturalistic view of ghosts and spirits since the Qin and Han dynasties propelled the development of atheism from a narrow sense to a broad sense. Later, Wang Fuzi ^[21] identified himself as one who "admired the orthodox learning of Zhang Hengqu." Building upon Zhang Zai’s thought and taking "intermingling qi" (yinyun zhi qi) as the substance, Wang constructed a "transcendental qi-learning," becoming another milestone in the development of atheistic thought. From this, we can say that Zhang Zai’s view of ghosts and spirits was not a deviation from the development of atheism, but rather its "candid friend" (zhengyou).