Wang Shiliang: The Two-Way Interaction Between Chinese Philosophy and Marxist Atheism and Its Significance
In the fields of the history of Chinese philosophy and the history of religion, Mr. Ren Jiyu (1916–2009) stands out for his distinct Marxist theoretical stance and methodological self-awareness. His research on the "Three Histories" of Chinese philosophy and the "Three Teachings" of Confucianism, Buddhism, and Taoism has exerted a profound influence. Ren Jiyu’s writing on the history of philosophy was guided by Marxism and later significantly influenced by his thesis on "Confucianism as a religion" (儒教论说), forming an interpretive path that integrated the history of philosophy with the history of the Confucian religion. Persisting in the integration of Marxist principles with the actual conditions of Chinese philosophy, Ren demonstrated the developmental process of Chinese philosophy through its struggle against religion, deepening the understanding of the history of Chinese philosophical cognition and its laws of development. In his research, he implemented an academic mission of unifying philosophical study with the critique of theology, expanding the "ideological front" of Marxist atheism and realizing a reciprocal interaction between Chinese philosophical research and Marxist atheism. This holds important ideological and methodological significance for advancing the study, propaganda, and education of Marxist atheism in the New Era.
I. The "Three Histories" and "Three Teachings": Ren Jiyu’s Research on the History of Chinese Philosophy and Religion
Regarding the developmental trajectory of the history of Chinese philosophy and religion (especially since the founding of New China), Mr. Ren Jiyu occupies a unique position. In the name of "Chinese Philosophy," Ren served as the chief editor of the "Three Histories": The History of Chinese Philosophy (four volumes, with the first volume published in July 1963), An Abridged History of Chinese Philosophy (first published in July 1973), and the post-Reform and Opening Up work The History of the Development of Chinese Philosophy (the Pre-Qin volume of which was first published in October 1983). Among these, due to its special status as a national textbook for liberal arts in higher education, the four-volume History of Chinese Philosophy has seen numerous editions and reprints, playing a vital role in the teaching and research of the history of Chinese philosophy since the founding of the People's Republic. Chen Lai [1] believes that Mr. Ren Jiyu’s "Three Histories" can stand alongside Mr. Feng Youlan’s [2] "Three Histories Discussing the Past and Present."
Beyond the "Three Histories" of philosophy, Mr. Ren Jiyu conducted in-depth research on the "Three Teachings" of Confucianism, Buddhism, and Taoism, authoring a vast number of works and serving as chief editor for The History of Chinese Buddhism and The History of Chinese Taoism [3]. It is especially necessary to point out that at the beginning of the Reform and Opening Up period, Ren proposed the view that Confucianism is a religion. He wrote numerous articles to demonstrate this, such as "On the Formation of the Confucian Religion" (1980) and "Re-evaluating the Confucian Religion" (1982). Under this perspective, he provided a new interpretation of the historical development of traditional Chinese Confucianism and outlined the developmental threads of the history of the Confucian religion. Ren Jiyu’s thesis that "Confucianism is a religion" (儒教是教说) profoundly influenced the editorial characteristics of The History of the Development of Chinese Philosophy [4]. Under the influence of this theory, Li Shen authored The History of the Chinese Confucian Religion, published at the turn of the century (in two volumes in 1999 and 2000), which further demonstrated and developed Ren Jiyu’s propositions. In terms of the research results and academic innovations regarding the "Three Histories" and "Three Teachings" mentioned above, the diligence of Mr. Ren Jiyu’s labor, the breadth of his scope, the abundance of his output, and the depth of his influence are extremely rare even among great masters of the history of Chinese philosophy and religion. He made indelible and monumental contributions to the disciplinary development and advancement of research into Chinese philosophy and religion.
II. Ren Jiyu’s Marxist View of Philosophical History and Its Further Development Based on the Thesis that "Confucianism is a Religion"
Ren Jiyu’s research on the history of Chinese philosophy possesses a distinct Marxist theoretical stance and methodological self-awareness; its important position and profound influence have been widely recognized by the academic community. Chen Lai evaluated him as a "well-deserved master of the 20th century who studied Chinese philosophy using Marxist methods" [5]. Chai Wenhua, examining the entire developmental process of the discipline of the history of Chinese philosophy, considers Ren Jiyu an "important representative of the stage of the Marxistization of the discipline of the history of Chinese philosophy" [6]. Qiao Qingju, in reviewing Ren’s four-volume History of Chinese Philosophy, also argued that it "played a tremendous role in promoting the use of Marxism as a meta-theory to understand the history of Chinese philosophy" [7].
(1) The History of Struggle and the History of Cognition: The Basic Threads of Ren Jiyu’s Philosophical Historiography
The four-volume History of Chinese Philosophy was first published in 1963 and revised through multiple editions in 1964, 1979, 1984, and 1996 [8]. Although there were revisions during this period, the view of philosophical history and the basic content did not undergo major changes; the fact that his "perspectives changed and understanding advanced" [9] is primarily reflected in The History of the Development of Chinese Philosophy [10].
In the introduction to the four-volume History of Chinese Philosophy, Ren Jiyu defined the object and task of the history of philosophy. He proposed that "the history of philosophy is a history of the struggle between materialism and idealism, and between dialectics and metaphysics; it is the history of the development of the cognition of all humanity" [11]. This proposition can be divided into two sub-propositions: the "history of struggle" and the "history of the development of cognition." The former is a typical "history of struggle" view, significantly influenced by Zhdanov’s [3] definition of the history of philosophy [12]. However, simultaneously viewing the history of philosophy as the "history of the development of the cognition of all humanity" reflects, to a certain extent, Ren Jiyu’s rational reflection on the essence of philosophical history. Revealing the "dialectical process of the increasing deepening of human cognition" through the "study of the unity of opposites" [13] is thus an important task of the history of philosophy.
Ren Jiyu placed particular emphasis on the "search for the roots of philosophical thought," believing this is primarily achieved through the analysis of the social productive forces and class struggle. He maintained that class analysis is the fundamental method of Marxism and devoted considerable space in his introduction to explaining this [14]. It could be said that the basic Marxist principles or meta-theories inherent in the four-volume History of Chinese Philosophy are concentrated in the persistence of the "struggle view" of philosophical history and the method of class analysis. Regarding the relationship between the two, Ren stated: "The struggle between the two lines of materialism and idealism in the history of philosophy is merely a reflection of the class struggle in society" [15]. This judgment indicates that, compared to analyzing the ideological attributes of the research object as materialist or idealist, revealing its "intellectual roots" through class analysis holds a more fundamental status.
The History of the Development of Chinese Philosophy both implements the "struggle view" and the method of class analysis while simultaneously containing reflections on the four-volume History of Chinese Philosophy—specifically reflections on Zhdanov’s definition of the history of philosophy, as well as on the methods and tasks of research in the field.
In the introduction to The History of the Development of Chinese Philosophy (Pre-Qin volume), Ren Jiyu stated bluntly that using Zhdanov’s definition to study the history of Chinese philosophy resulted in a certain "bias"—namely, "only seeing the battle between two armies in the history of philosophy and using all one's attention to divide philosophers into camps." What this ignored was "the internal structure of each philosophical system and its position in the history of cognition," as well as the universal laws and experiences/lessons in the developmental process of human cognition [16]. This was a significant change in Ren’s view of philosophical history; that is to say, the order of the two sub-propositions—that the history of philosophy is a "history of struggle" and "the history of the development of human cognition"—shifted. While continuing to adhere to the struggle view, he emphasized its significance first as "the history of the development of human cognition." Ren explicitly proposed that "the history of Chinese philosophy is the history of the cognition of the Chinese nation," noting: "It records in logical form the experience of the Chinese nation in understanding the world, and its historical experience provides extremely precious and rich content for the history of human cognition" [17].
(2) "Revealing the Laws of the Process by Which Human Cognition Breaks Free from Religion": The Fusion of Horizons Between the History of Philosophy and the History of the Confucian Religion
Ren Jiyu’s uniqueness also lies in his integration of the history of cognition and the history of struggle within philosophical research by combing through the relationship between philosophy and religion. From an epistemological perspective, he distinguished the essences of religion and philosophy, pointing out that "religion is a distorted reflection of the real world" by humanity. Regarding philosophy, he said: "Philosophy is different from religion; it is rational thinking generated by people through practice, and it is a distillation of the knowledge of the struggle for production and the knowledge of class struggle." According to Ren, philosophy "must provide regular [law-based] explanations for natural and social phenomena." However, due to different cognitive lines and explanations regarding the relationship between matter and spirit, it is divided into materialism and idealism. He meticulously parsed the relationships between philosophy, science, and religion, arguing that religion "opposes scientific practice" while idealism "distorts scientific practice," and that the two often "formed an alliance" in history. He emphasized that "the philosophy representing correct human thinking is materialism." From the perspective of historical development, as the "history of the development of human cognition," the process of philosophy's development is a "step-by-step process of casting off the shackles of religion." He stated: "The task of the history of the development of philosophy is to reveal the laws of the process by which human cognition breaks free from religion" [18].
Regarding "the history of Chinese philosophy as the history of the cognition of the Chinese nation," Ren Jiyu said: "It displays the course of development and advancement of Chinese philosophy through its struggle with religion... it also shows that philosophy compressed the jurisdiction of religion, while religion constantly changed its own forms to defend its positions" [19]. On this basis, Ren summarized the characteristics of the history of Chinese philosophy: beyond "the philosophical history of feudal society being the longest," the aspects he emphasized were that "theologized Confucianism occupies an absolute advantage" and that there is a "glorious tradition of materialism and atheism" [20]. Among these, the "absolute advantage of theologized Confucianism" reflects the long-standing state of "philosophy being subordinate to religion" [21] in Chinese feudal society. In this section, Ren reiterated the main points of his thesis that "Confucianism is a religion," such as: the Confucian religion "is a religion with a special form suited to the historical characteristics of Chinese feudal society"; although it lacks the external characteristics of general religions, it possesses all the essential attributes of a religion; and its development into the Confucian religion was completed through two transformations during the Han and Song dynasties [22]. The "glorious materialism and atheism" reflect the process and laws of critiquing theology and breaking free from religious shackles in the history of Chinese philosophy. Ren analyzed the social conditions that allowed this to develop, such as the lessons learned from extensive social struggles, the development of natural sciences, and the abundance of cultural classics.
From the above, it can be seen that Ren Jiyu combined the Marxist view of philosophical history with the ideological theory that "Confucianism is a religion," achieving a fusion of horizons between the history of philosophy and the history of the Confucian religion. In addition to the struggle between philosophy and religion in Chinese history, Ren also emphasized the close connection between Chinese philosophical thought—especially feudal ideology—and the feudal system, viewing the "critique of feudalism" as a task that those engaged in the study of the history of Chinese philosophy should consciously shoulder [23]. These new characteristics profoundly influenced the narrative threads of The History of the Development of Chinese Philosophy.
Han dynasty philosophy is a major focal point in the study of Chinese philosophical history and a key subject of Ren Jiyu’s Confucian religious theory and philosophical research. Ren’s interpretive path of fusing the history of philosophy and the history of the Confucian religion was practically implemented and vividly manifested in his interpretation of Han philosophy. By conducting a balanced comparative study of philosophical history works such as the four-volume History of Chinese Philosophy and The History of the Development of Chinese Philosophy, as well as his propositions like "Confucianism is a religion," one can parse his elaborations on Han thinkers like Dong Zhongshu, the Baihu Tong (Discourses in the White Tiger Hall), and Wang Chong. This holds theoretical significance for demonstrating the "course of development and advancement of Han philosophy in its struggle against religion" and for further understanding Ren Jiyu’s view of philosophical history and his Confucian religious theory.
III. The Interpretation of Han Dynasty Philosophy Under Ren Jiyu’s Perspective of Philosophical History
According to Ren Jiyu’s historical analysis of the formation and development of the Confucian religion, the evolution of Confucianism into a religion was completed through two major transformations of Confucius’s teachings during the Han and Song dynasties. Among these, the teleological theology of Han Confucianism—from Dong Zhongshu to the White Tiger Hall Conference—was precisely the key link in the "theologization" of Confucianism and the formation of the Confucian religion [24]. The interpretation of Han philosophy under Ren Jiyu’s perspective of philosophical history involves the theoretical expansion and historical demonstration of this view; additionally, through the intellectual interpretation of "militant atheists" represented by Wang Chong and Han dynasty natural sciences, it reveals the process and regularity of critiquing theology and breaking free from religious shackles during this period.
(1) The Theologization of Han Confucianism and the Completion of the "National Religion of Feudal Society"
Dong Zhongshu was the most creative and influential philosopher in Han Dynasty philosophy. The interpretation of Dong Zhongshu’s thought in the four-volume History of Chinese Philosophy (《中国哲学史》) was clearly influenced by the concepts of the "history of struggle" and the "history of cognition." Viewed through the lens of the history of struggle, Dong Zhongshu belongs to a "teleological system of idealist philosophy." His "purpose" was determined by his class attributes: namely, to serve autocratic centralism and satisfy the need of the rising landlord class to consolidate centralist autocratic rule. Regarding Dong’s method of argumentation, it "combined theology with philosophy" [32] to construct a theological idealist worldview and systematic theory based on "telepathic resonance between Heaven and humanity" (tianren ganying [9]). "Beginning with Dong Zhongshu, Confucius was deified, Confucian doctrine was religionized, and the theory of the feudal autocratic system was systematized." [33] Consequently, his system of idealist philosophy contained a thick veneer of religious theology; in the text of this book, philosophy and theology are intertwined, as seen in terms like "abstract theological idealist ethics" [34] and "theological idealist worldview" [35]. Specifically, the section on Dong Zhongshu in the four-volume History of Chinese Philosophy is divided into six sections. The first section covers political theory, which reflects the basic Marxist methods of the history of struggle and class analysis, emphasizing the socio-political background of the formation of Dong’s philosophy, its class attributes, and its theoretical task of "demonstrating the sanctity and supremacy of 'monarchical power'." [36] The second section covers the "worldview of the theory of telepathic resonance between Heaven and humanity," taking "Heaven" (tian) as the center to discuss the foundational and core components of Dong’s philosophical system, presenting the religionized characteristics of his worldview. Sections three through six are specific manifestations of this theological idealist worldview in terms of epistemology, ethics, and the historical outlook. The basic structure of Dong Zhongshu’s intellectual system established in the four-volume History of Chinese Philosophy was inherited by the History of the Development of Chinese Philosophy (《中国哲学发展史》), albeit with some adjustments.
The History of the Development of Chinese Philosophy was clearly influenced by Ren Jiyu’s thesis that "Confucianism is a religion" [10], defining Dong Zhongshu’s thought as a "theological system of telepathic resonance between Heaven and humanity." The study of Dong Zhongshu in this book is divided into ten parts, the first six of which introduce Dong’s doctrine of resonance between Heaven and humanity, thereby highlighting Dong’s "mission" to "consolidate and strengthen Han Dynasty feudal centralist rule" and its "essence" as "feudal theology." [37] The History of the Development of Chinese Philosophy more explicitly clarifies the religious significance of Dong’s "Heaven" as the "ruler of the gods, governing both paradise and the human world," [38] providing a comprehensive exposition of the Yin-Yang and Five Elements doctrine within Dong’s theological system. It emphasizes their significance to Dong’s theological theory as a "rigid format for the resonance between Heaven and humanity." [39] "Dong Zhongshu mystified the Yin-Yang and Five Elements into the will of Heaven... The ideas of Yin and Yang, which originally belonged to the category of simple dialectics, were completely transformed into theological theory through his modification." [40]
The book also focuses on the moral attributes of Heaven: on one hand, Dong Zhongshu emphasized that Heaven "sustains people with food and clothing, and instructs people through rites and righteousness," displaying its "perfection and supreme goodness" as well as the benevolence (ren) and virtue it shows toward all things, and especially toward the people. "Heaven gives birth to and sustains all things in a continuous cycle of creation; thus, the benevolence and virtue of Heaven are infinite... Heaven’s purpose is to benefit and provide for the people so they may be self-sufficient, which determines that all its activities are manifestations of goodness." On the other hand, it emphasizes the significance of humanity "modeling itself after Heaven." Dong Zhongshu’s so-called "system of benevolence and righteousness" and the "Three Bonds of the Kingly Way" [11] thus obtained a basis of legitimacy as things "wholly taken from Heaven" and "attainable from Heaven." "In turn, the ethical attributes of the human world are described as originating from Heaven; this also shows that the goodness of Heaven spoken of by Dong Zhongshu was not a purely abstract concept, but rather embodied feudal human ethics." [41] According to the History of the Development of Chinese Philosophy, Dong Zhongshu’s theory of resonance between Heaven and humanity was not a general relationship between Heaven and man; one of its "theoretical cores" is that "the sovereign acts by receiving the will of Heaven, and therefore relies on moral instruction rather than punishment." The object of moral instruction is the people; therefore, what is reflected here is the relationship among the triad of Heaven, the sovereign, and the people. The History of the Development of Chinese Philosophy attaches great importance to Dong Zhongshu’s idea of "constraining the people to elevate the sovereign, and constraining the sovereign to elevate Heaven." It considers the former to "strengthen monarchical power by borrowing the authority of Heaven," reflecting the "class substance" and "historical mission" of his doctrine, while the latter "uses the Mandate of Heaven to restrain the sovereign," reflecting the "practical significance" of his doctrine. [42] The book argues that through the logic of "the Son of Heaven receives his mandate from Heaven, and the world receives its mandate from the Son of Heaven," Dong constructed a "theological subordinate relationship of Heaven—Son of Heaven (Sovereign)—People," which became the "theocratic format for China’s long-term feudal society thereafter." [43] The theories of human nature, epistemology, and political views introduced in sections seven, eight, and nine are also developed within this interpretive framework, such as explaining Dong’s theory of human nature and his advocacy for "regulated systems" through the phrases "the sovereign receives the will of Heaven to complete the nature of the people" and "Heaven’s creation of the people was not for the sake of the sovereign, but Heaven established the sovereign for the sake of the people."
From the above, it can be seen that the History of the Development of Chinese Philosophy continued the Marxist principles and methods of the four-volume History of Chinese Philosophy. Through a detailed philosophical argument, it sorted through the basic content of Dong Zhongshu’s intellectual system and, within the horizon of Ren Jiyu’s thesis that Confucianism is a religion, demonstrated the "major change" in the image of Confucianism created by Dong Zhongshu’s "theologized Confucianism." [44]
According to the History of the Development of Chinese Philosophy, the theological system constructed by Dong Zhongshu formed a "major change" in the image of Confucianism, but for the complete theological theory required by the feudal ruling class—that is, the formation of a state religion where "sacrificial rituals and theological theory are closely integrated"—it was merely a "beginning." Only after being enriched and developed by the theology of apocrypha (chenwei [12]), and after Confucian classical studies had overcome internal contradictions and divergences, was this "completed" by the White Tiger Hall Conference hosted personally by Emperor Zhang of Han and its resulting document, the White Tiger Hall Virtuous Discussions (Baihu Tong). [45] "The religious theological system of the Baihu Tong is the summary of this historical process, marking the completion of the establishment of state religion in feudal society." [46] Regarding the obvious characteristics of this state religion, the book points out: "Its sacrificial rituals were a privilege enjoyed by the ruling class, reflecting the power structure of feudal society, while the powerless masses were completely excluded and forbidden from overstepping. Its theological theory focused on resolving the issues of the divine right of kings and the transition of national destiny, caring only for the interests of the feudal state while completely ignoring the suffering in the real lives of the broad masses. Its primary function was merely to strive to deify the state system and the monarch, providing a theological basis for the polity of monarchical autocracy, without paying attention to pointing out a way out of suffering for the masses." It can be observed that these characteristics reflect the "state-oriented" and "feudal" nature of this "state religion." Its "religiosity" did not exceed Dong Zhongshu’s theory, remaining a "relatively crude" theoretical form created through the deification of the Son of Heaven, the Yin-Yang and Five Elements, and the "Three Bonds and Five Constants" [13]. "It inherited Dong Zhongshu’s technique, deriving a set of celestial orders directly from the real order of the feudal state at that time, with almost no speculative mediation." In short, according to the book, although the Baihu Tong lacked theoretical originality—"miscellaneously discussing classics and commentaries, supplemented by apocryphal records"—it represented "an important historical stage in the development from Confucianism (ruxue) to the Confucian Religion (rujiao)" because of its status as the "state religion of feudal society." [47]
(2) The "Course of Development and Progress in the Struggle Against Religion" in Han Dynasty Philosophy
As mentioned previously, Ren Jiyu regarded "revealing the regularity of the process by which human cognition breaks free from religion" as the task of research into the history of philosophy. Therefore, in addition to revealing the theologization of Han Dynasty Confucianism and its development into a state religion, the History of the Development of Chinese Philosophy also introduces the intellectual developments of this period that criticized theology and broke free from religious constraints. "At the very same time the Baihu Tong was completing its system of religious theology, Wang Chong, far from the capital in Kuaiji, was busily writing to 'attack falsehoods' (ji xuwang [14]). This was a struggle between reason and faith in China’s Middle Ages, possessing extremely important significance in the history of thought." [48] The book introduces in detail Wang Chong’s critique of "Han Dynasty Confucian Religion," specifically including: reducing Heaven to a natural object; using qi (vital energy) and the transformation of qi to explain the relationship between nature, society, and the human body as well as various phenomena; using materialism to explain Heaven and nature; and criticizing teleological theology and the theory of resonance, which was a "powerful negation of heavenly gods" that shook the basic tenets of the "worship of heavenly gods" in the Confucian Religion, "striking the vital organs of the Confucian Religion." By using the argument that "the dead do not become ghosts" to launch a profound critique of the doctrine of ghosts and gods, he "pulled the theoretical rug out from under the Confucian Religion’s ancestor worship," thereby gaining "significance in opposing the ritual code (lijiao)"; he also proposed that "sages are not divine," opposing the worship of sages and the worship of classics and commentaries. [49]
Importantly, the book analyzes Wang Chong’s intellectual method and its successes and failures, revealing on this basis the laws of the struggle between reason and faith during this period. According to the book, as a "militant atheist," Wang Chong "did not separate theory from facts, nor facts from theory," adopting an empiricism that contained rational elements: "Relying solely on repeating the general theory of the Way of Heaven as natural and non-action (wuwei) was no longer sufficient to effectively deal with the overflow of theology. To counter the various theological views and superstitious taboos flooding society, a militant materialist must use a large body of facts to carry out systematic and concrete refutations of their main arguments; only in this way can a powerful blow be dealt to the trend of theistic thought. From the perspective of the laws of intellectual struggle, this step had to be taken; it was Wang Chong who brilliantly undertook this historical task." [50] From the perspective of the history of the development of cognition, in the "intellectual struggle" to explain natural and social phenomena and criticize theology and secular superstition, Wang Chong promoted the specification of the materialistic worldview and "deepened the theory of materialism." [51] From the perspective of the history of Chinese atheism, Wang Chong established a "monumental landmark that inherited from the past and opened the way for the future," both absorbing the essence of atheism since the pre-Qin period and exerting a major influence on subsequent generations, such as during the Wei-Jin period and the late Ming and early Qing dynasties.
The book analyzes the limitations and weaknesses existing in Wang Chong’s empiricism due to insufficient theoretical thinking from an epistemological perspective. Within his thought, there were contradictions such as discussing the natural Way of Heaven while simultaneously advocating fatalism regarding "human fate," "national fate," and "the sovereign's fate," or opposing the theory of resonance while advocating the "correspondence of auspicious omens." Therefore, he failed to become a thorough atheist. "To uphold thorough atheism, one must adhere to an epistemology that combines perceptual and rational experience, and one must adhere to the dialectical method of thought." [52]
In addition to summarizing the regularity of the critique of theology from the fields of the history of philosophical cognition and "intellectual methods," the History of the Development of Chinese Philosophy devotes a special chapter to introducing the relationship between philosophy and science in the Han Dynasty. "Only where science has truly occupied the ground can there be no place for theology to stand." [53] This part is not a history of Han Dynasty science and technology, but a comprehensive analysis of the intellectual relationship between philosophy, religion, and science in the Han Dynasty, which also contains a critique of Confucian theology. The book provides a holistic account of the characteristics of scientific development in the Han Dynasty: "The formation of a system of natural science in the Han Dynasty was in step with the trend toward unification in politics, economy, and ideology. People in the Han Dynasty strove to connect various natural phenomena with each other, as well as natural phenomena with social phenomena, to construct an all-encompassing cosmic system; the intellectual basis for doing so was the idea of the unity of Heaven and humanity." [54] This passage contains two aspects: first, Han Dynasty natural science was significantly influenced by state politics, or rather "was a direct or indirect projection of the real life of the feudal patriarchal system," such as astronomical observations being used to verify political successes and failures; second, Han Dynasty natural science took the unity of Heaven and humanity as its guiding ideology, "viewing Heaven, Earth, and humanity as a unified whole in every possible field." [55] In this regard, an obvious tension existed between the theory of resonance between Heaven and humanity in Han Dynasty Confucian Religion and Han Dynasty natural science: the theory of resonance promoted certain specific relationships between Heaven, humans, and things—as well as the relatively simple natural scientific knowledge of the time—into more universal connections. For example, Dong Zhongshu expanded the concept that "things move according to their kind" to the mutual resonance between Heaven and humanity, thereby "swallowing and capturing the scientific knowledge people gained in practice, making such knowledge a constituent part of teleological theology." [56] More importantly, the understanding of the relationship between Heaven and humanity formed by various fields of natural science also demonstrated a struggle against the teleological theology of the Confucian Religion. In the section "Agriculture, Agronomy, and Philosophy," the History of the Development of Chinese Philosophy points out at the beginning: "The influence of agriculture and agricultural science on philosophy was mainly manifested in the understanding of the relationship between Heaven and humanity." [57] It also emphasizes: "Agriculture can be said to be the occasion for the direct interaction between Heaven and humanity... In agricultural production, people saw that through their own efforts, they could obtain better harvests, which helped to dispel superstition regarding the will of Heaven." [58]
However, the book devotes the most space and the most detailed analysis to the section on medicine. In particular, it introduces in detail the Han Dynasty medical community's absorption and development of the theory of Yin-Yang and the Five Elements [15], as well as its basic concepts regarding health cultivation and treatment. It demonstrates a characteristic of always prioritizing medical practice, which is diametrically opposed to Dong Zhongshu’s [16] theological teleology. "If we say that Dong Zhongshu primarily seized upon the aspect of Heaven [17] as the supreme object of religious worship and that his discourse on the unity of Heaven and man and the induction between Heaven and man [18] was theology, then the Neijing [19] primarily seized upon the aspect of Heaven as a natural object... It can be said that at that time, no science could make people feel the close connection between humanity and nature as profoundly as medicine did... It held that conforming to the changes of nature was the best way to maintain physical health." [65] According to the book, the contribution of Han Dynasty medicine is also reflected in its research into qi [20], positing that the qi formed in Han medical practice is a perceptible objective reality and that qi is the medium through which things are interconnected and interact. These views "provided a basis for the philosophy of qi monism," which was the "most primary" influence that Han Dynasty science exerted on philosophy. [66]
IV. The Two-Way Interaction Between Chinese Philosophy and Marxist Atheism and Its Significance
Research on Han Dynasty philosophy within the horizon of Ren Jiyu’s history of philosophy centers on Dong Zhongshu and the Baihu Tong [21] to elaborate in detail on the theological development of Han Confucianism and the historical process of its completion as the "state religion of feudal society." This includes the theoretical expansion and historical demonstration of his "Confucianism-as-religion" thesis. Furthermore, through the intellectual interpretation of "militant atheists" represented by Wang Chong [22] and the natural sciences of the Han Dynasty, it summarizes the process and patterns of criticizing theology and breaking free from religious fetters, revealing the relationship between philosophy, religion, and science during this period, as well as the "struggle between reason and faith." Overall, the interpretive path of integrating the history of philosophy with the history of Confucianism is effectively implemented and vividly displayed in Ren Jiyu's research on Han philosophy. It embodies the two-way interaction between Chinese philosophy and Marxist atheism and possesses important ideological and methodological significance.
First, Ren Jiyu insisted on combining Marxist principles with the actual conditions of Chinese philosophy, demonstrating the historical course of Chinese philosophy's advancement through struggles with religion, and deepening the understanding of the history of Chinese philosophical cognition and its laws of development. In Ren’s view, whether the history of Chinese philosophy can truly become a science depends on "how well historical materialism is applied," [67] namely "how to correctly understand the basic principles of Marxism and how to combine these principles with the specific realities of the development of Chinese philosophy." [68] Ren also proposed specific methods such as "placing problems within a certain historical scope" and "conducting specific class analysis." [69] Looking at the interpretation of Dong Zhongshu’s thought, the History of Chinese Philosophy (four-volume edition) and the History of the Development of Chinese Philosophy embody a dual horizon of the history of philosophy and the history of Confucianism, achieving an integration of the two. On one hand, by analyzing the ideological attributes and methods of materialism and idealism, dialectics and metaphysics in Dong Zhongshu’s philosophy, his position in the history of the Chinese nation's cognition was clarified. On the other hand, through the explanation of Dong Zhongshu’s theological system of "induction between Heaven and man" and the analysis of his class attributes, the inherent connection between Dong Zhongshu and the socio-political life of the Han Dynasty and China since the Han was further clarified. This presented the basic appearance and historical influence of a typically manifested system of Confucian theological thought. Therefore, adopting an interpretive path that integrates the history of philosophy and the history of Confucianism is of great enlightening significance for understanding the intellectual characteristics and historical status of Dong Zhongshu and even traditional Confucian philosophy.
Second, Ren Jiyu insisted on "revealing the regularity of the process by which human cognition breaks free from religion." He implemented the academic tenet of unifying philosophical research with the critique of theology within the study of Chinese philosophy, expanding the "ideological frontline" of Marxist atheism. This also holds important ideological and methodological significance for promoting Marxist atheism research, publicity, and education in the New Era. In an article written in 1977 to commemorate the first anniversary of Mao Zedong’s death, Ren Jiyu revisited Mao’s instructions on criticizing theology. He highly appraised Mao’s assertion that "one cannot write a good history of philosophy without criticizing theology," calling it "extremely profound," and argued that workers in philosophy, literature, and history should shoulder "greater responsibility" for the critique of theology. [70] In Ren's view, religious theology is characterized by idealistic and metaphysical worldviews, the promotion of obscurantism, and the propagation of "liberation" through "introspection" and "confession." It provides arguments for the idea that "exploitation is justified and oppression is justified." Regarding Chinese history, it has always been a "spiritual shackle used by feudal autocracy to rule the people." [71] Consequently, it is necessary to thoroughly expose the class and epistemological roots of religious theology to fully implement materialist principles and "expand the ideological frontline of Marxism." [72] As previously mentioned, in addition to the characteristics of the history of Chinese philosophy being the "longest history of feudal philosophy" and "the great dominance of theologized Confucianism," Ren Jiyu specifically emphasized the important aspect of having a "glorious tradition of materialism and atheism." Therefore, criticizing theology and feudal autocracy while promoting materialism and atheism became prominent features of Ren Jiyu’s research into the history of philosophy. From the intellectual interpretation of Han Dynasty philosophy, one can find that Ren Jiyu insisted on the unity of researching philosophy and criticizing theology, the unity of criticizing theology and criticizing feudal autocracy, and the unity of revealing the class and epistemological roots of theology, thereby practicing his "political responsibility." [73] Xi Wuyi [23] believes that "studying religion and criticizing theology" was the "academic concept Ren Jiyu adhered to throughout his life," [74] which is an objective and accurate evaluation. In fact, the concept of criticizing theology consistently ran through Ren Jiyu’s philosophical research work.
As a university textbook for the liberal arts, the History of Chinese Philosophy (four-volume edition) has been reprinted many times since its first edition in 1963; even as late as 2003, Mr. Ren Jiyu still presided over its revision. Although the History of the Development of Chinese Philosophy remains an unfinished work (as the volumes on the Song, Yuan, Ming, Qing, and modern periods were not completed), it still played an irreplaceable role in the research and teaching of the history of Chinese philosophy during the early period of Reform and Opening Up. It can be said that the time span over which Ren Jiyu presided over Chinese philosophy research, the number of editions and printings, and the number of authoritative experts participating in the drafting were all second to none. His distinct Marxist view of the history of philosophy and his academic tenet of criticizing theology and promoting atheism have influenced generations of scholars and young students.
Therefore, from the perspective of criticizing theology and promoting Marxist atheism, Ren Jiyu’s research into the history of Chinese philosophy not only practiced his own "political responsibility" but also truly expanded the "ideological frontline" of Marxist atheism, reflecting an interdisciplinary vision and a comprehensive research method. In fact, within the horizon of the "Confucianism-as-religion" debate, Ren Jiyu advocated for examination from a "broader vision" (such as sociology and anthropology) rather than being confined to "disputing right and wrong based on interpretations from within Confucianism itself." [75]
At present, the integrated characteristics of the "New Humanities" [24] are becoming increasingly prominent. The Party and the state have also continuously introduced new measures regarding the construction of ideological and political theory courses, "curriculum-based ideological and political education" [25], and the "Great Ideological and Political Course" [26] in the New Era. Therefore, how to combine these with the current disciplinary system and development trends, and how to integrate them into the curriculum and textbook systems to further implement the guidelines and policies of the Party and the state, should be the important directions that we strive to consider in promoting Marxist atheism research, publicity, and education in the New Era.
Web Editor: Tong Xin Source: Science and Atheism, Issue 3, 2023