Ni Suxiang: On the "Advocating Benevolence" Thought in Fine Traditional Chinese Culture

In a speech delivered while presiding over the 13th collective study session of the Political Bureau of the 18th CPC Central Committee, Xi Jinping pointed out that we must "deeply mine and elucidate the contemporary value of the principles of advocating benevolence (仁爱, ren'ai), emphasizing the people as the foundation, observing sincerity and trustworthiness, upholding justice, valuing harmony, and seeking the Great Unity ^[1] within fine traditional Chinese culture, so as to make it an important source for nourishing the Socialist Core Values." "Benevolence" is the core thought of fine traditional Chinese culture and the most concentrated expression of the essence of Chinese civilization. In the long river of Chinese cultural history, "advocating benevolence" not only possesses a profound theoretical background and process of development and evolution, but has also formed a rich system of ideological connotations.

I. The Theoretical Foundations of "Advocating Benevolence"

The Shuowen Jiezi ^[2] defines "benevolence" (ren) as: "Kindness (亲, qin). It is derived from 'person' (人, ren) and 'two' (二, er)." From an etymological perspective, the character ren (仁) can be decomposed into the characters for "person" and "two." Here, "person" refers to oneself, while "two" refers to the other; thus, "benevolence" is both the basis for why a human is human and the basic moral law for regulating social interaction between oneself and others. In traditional Chinese culture, "benevolence" is not only manifested as an awakening of "human" consciousness and the respect and kind treatment of life, but is also a signifier of the vital interconnection among "heaven, earth, self, others, and things." Confucius explicitly proposed "benevolence" as the core of the civilization of rites and music, defining it as "loving others" (爱人, ai ren). Consequently, the thought of "benevolence" became a vital component of fine traditional Chinese moral culture, laying the cultural and spiritual bedrock for the Chinese nation’s character of friendliness, kindness, and peace. This thought also inaugurated the tradition of "advocating benevolence"—that is, esteeming and practicing benevolence. In the historical development of Chinese civilization, "advocating benevolence" not only possesses a profound accumulation of practice but also contains a deep theoretical logic.

(1) The Ontological Foundation of the "Unity of Heaven and Humanity"

The idea of the "unity of Heaven and humanity" (天人合一, tian ren he yi) has a long history in traditional Chinese culture and constitutes the core content of the Chinese nation's worldview. As early as the Western Zhou period ^[3], "Heaven" (天, tian) exhibited multiple meanings: it referred to the natural sky, the volitional Heaven capable of rewarding good and punishing evil, and, more importantly, the moral Heaven that established ethical norms. During this period, building upon the relationship between Heaven and humanity—that is, the relationship between the divine and the human—inherited from the Shang Dynasty, "Heaven" was endowed with the moral attribute of "respecting virtue and protecting the people" (敬德保民, jing de bao min). This ensured the alignment of Heaven's likes and dislikes with those of the "people," thereby forming a cognitive system connecting "the mandate of Heaven" with "human affairs," marking the early budding of the "unity of Heaven and humanity." The Book of Documents ^[4] in the "Great Declaration" (泰誓, Tai Shi) records: "Heaven sees as my people see; Heaven hears as my people hear." The "Counsels of Gao Yao" (皋陶谟, Gao Yao Mo) in the same volume states: "Heaven's intelligence reflects our people's intelligence. Heaven's brightness and awesomeness reflect our people's brightness and awesomeness. It reaches from above to below; be reverent, O possessors of the land!" These all express the concept of the unity of the Way of Heaven and the will of the people. The "Announcement of Duke Shao" in the Book of Documents records: "I do not dare to know and say that the Yin ^[5] received the mandate of Heaven for a set number of years; I do not dare to know and say it could not have been extended. It was because they did not respect virtue that they early let fall their mandate." The idea of "matching Heaven with virtue" contained therein also reflects the "unity of Heaven and humanity" in a moral sense.

On this basis, the Daoists, Shaolinists, and other schools during the Spring and Autumn and Warring States periods ^[6] further interpreted the relationship between Heaven and humanity. Laozi, the representative of Daoism, argued for the "unity of Heaven and humanity" in a metaphysical sense, noting that "The Way of Heaven has no favorites; it is always with the good person," meaning that the "personal Heaven" or "volitional Heaven" is one with human virtuous conduct. Zhuangzi, another representative of Daoism, developed the idea from the perspective that "things are neither noble nor base" and "all things are one." As stated in the Zhuangzi chapter "On the Equality of Things" (齐物论, Qi Wu Lun): "Heaven, Earth, and I were born together, and the ten thousand things and I are one," referring to the integration of humanity with the nature of Heaven, Earth, and all things. This conception of the convergence of Heaven and humanity constructed by Daoism in a metaphysical sense provided a theoretical foundation for its thoughts on treasuring life and self-loving kindness.

Confucianism similarly advocated for the interconnection and interaction between Heaven and humanity. Confucius believed that "Heaven" was an external, irresistible "anthropomorphic deity" with a sacred will; therefore, Heaven was the supreme existence for humanity, as in "Heaven endowed me with virtue." At the same time, Confucius emphasized human agency, believing that humans could reach the realm of unity with Heaven through the moral practice of being virtuous and benevolent, saying, "To restrain oneself and return to the rites is benevolence. Is the practice of benevolence from oneself, or from others?" Mencius also discussed the "unity of Heaven and humanity" within the connotation of a moral Heaven: "He who exhausts his mind knows his nature. Knowing his nature, he knows Heaven." The connection between human nature and Heaven lies in the fact that "nature" is "what Heaven has given to me." Thus, the morality of "Heaven" and the benevolence and goodness of "humanity" are consistent. Mencius thereby established the ontological foundation for "advocating benevolence" through the idea that "all things are complete in me."

The Confucian thought of the "unity of Heaven and humanity" developed during the Song and Ming dynasties into the idea that "humanity and the ten thousand things are of one body," establishing the ontological basis for advocating benevolence. Zhang Zai ^[7] wrote: "That which fills the universe, I regard as my body; that which directs the universe, I regard as my nature. All people are my brothers and sisters, and all things are my companions." He added: "The Confucian reaches sincerity through enlightenment, and enlightenment through sincerity; thus, Heaven and humanity are one." The benevolent thought proposed by Zhang Zai—that all commoners are one's compatriots and all things are one's friends—was no longer a blood-based love starting from "affection for kin" (亲亲, qin qin), but a universal love rooted in the "unity of Heaven and humanity" as an ontology. Cheng Hao ^[8] also explicitly proposed: "The student must first recognize benevolence. The benevolent person is indistinguishably one with all things. Righteousness, ritual, wisdom, and trustworthiness are all benevolence." That is, "The benevolent person regards Heaven, Earth, and the ten thousand things as one body; there is nothing that is not himself," further placing "benevolence" at the height of ontology. Wang Yangming was the great synthesizer of the "unity of Heaven and humanity" thought. He believed: "The great man can regard Heaven, Earth, and the ten thousand things as one body, not because he wishes to do so, but because the benevolence of his mind is naturally like this." He proposed "to extend my innate benevolence of the one body, then my 'illustrious virtue' ^[9] begins to shine, and I can truly regard Heaven, Earth, and the ten thousand things as one body." Wang Yangming’s view of "one-body benevolence" provided a further ontological demonstration for "advocating benevolence." At this point, "Confucius’s 'graded love' (差等之爱, chadeng zhi ai) was developed by Mencius into the Song-Ming Neo-Confucian thought, especially Wang Yangming’s 'benevolence of the one body of all things,' combining graded love with universal love, thereby greatly developing Confucius’s thought and elevating the Confucian moral view to a new height. This was the peak of the development of the 'unity of Heaven and humanity' and best represents the essence of Confucian moral thought," constructing a complete ontological basis for "advocating benevolence."

(2) The Human Nature Foundation of "Original Goodness"

The tradition of the theory of the original goodness of human nature, initiated by Confucius and synthesized by Mencius, is the human nature foundation of "advocating benevolence." The Analects records: "The Master said: 'By nature, men are nearly alike; by practice, they get to be wide apart.'" Confucius believed that "human nature" was similar among people, but he did not explicitly state whether nature was good or evil. Therefore, one cannot conclude from this sentence alone that Confucius advocated the theory of original goodness. However, combined with his other assertions, one can find a tendency toward this theory, such as: "Only the wise of the highest class and the stupid of the lowest class do not change," and "Those who are born with the possession of knowledge are the highest class of men. Those who learn, and so, readily, get possession of knowledge, are the next. Those who are dull and stupid, and yet compass the learning, are another class next to these. As to those who are dull and stupid and yet do not learn—they are the lowest of the people." From this, it is evident that Confucius greatly admired and affirmed the innate existence of "high wisdom" and "those born with knowledge" in human nature. Furthermore, Confucius believed that certain qualities of "benevolence" existed in human nature, stating: "Is benevolence so far off? I desire benevolence, and lo! benevolence is at hand." This indicates that benevolent virtue exists within the person, and the key to whether one advocates benevolence lies in the subject's own virtuous actions. If one is willing to do benevolent things, one will achieve benevolence. Thus, it can be seen that Confucius was full of expectation and affirmation regarding human nature, showing a tendency toward the theory of original goodness.

Mencius sought to excavate the "original goodness" part of Confucius's thought, constructing a relatively complete system of the theory of original goodness and providing a solid theoretical cornerstone for "advocating benevolence." The Mencius records: "Gaozi said: 'Nature is neither good nor bad.' Some say: 'Nature may be made to practice good, and it may be made to practice evil. This is why when Kings Wen and Wu arose, the people loved what was good; when Kings You and Li arose, the people loved what was cruel.' Some say: 'The nature of some is good, and the nature of others is bad. Hence it was under Yao as a sovereign there was the rebel Xiang; with Gu Sou as a father there was Shun; with Zhou as the son of their elder brother and also their sovereign, there were Wei Zi Qi and Prince Bi Gan.' Now you say 'nature is good'; then are all those others wrong?" It is clear from this passage that three representative theories of human nature already existed: that nature is neither good nor evil, that it can be either good or evil, and that good and evil are mixed. Mencius critiqued these three views and explicitly proposed that human nature is good: "As far as what is genuinely in him is concerned, a man is capable of becoming good; that is what I mean by good. As for his becoming bad, that is not the fault of his native endowment. The feeling of commiseration belongs to all men; so does that of shame and dislike; and that of reverence and respect; and that of approving and disapproving." The conclusion was: "The tendency of man’s nature to good is like the tendency of water to flow downwards. There are none but have this tendency to good, just as all water flows downwards." "The reason why I say that all men have a mind which cannot bear to see the sufferings of others is this: even nowadays, if men suddenly see a child about to fall into a well, they will without exception experience a feeling of alarm and distress." Mencius believed that the innate feeling of commiseration is the source of "benevolence," providing a human nature foundation for "advocating benevolence."

Contrary to Mencius, Xunzi proposed the "theory of original evil." Xunzi explained the connotation of "nature," believing that "Nature is the original, raw material" and "That which is so by birth is called nature"—that is, human nature refers to man's instinctual disposition. To this end, he opposed Mencius’s theory of original goodness, pointing out: "Mencius says: 'Human nature is good; everyone's nature is like this.' I say: This is not so. He does not understand the nature of man and does not distinguish between nature and acquired effort (伪, wei). Nature is what is given by Heaven; it cannot be learned, it cannot be worked at. Ritual and righteousness are what were created by sages; they are what humans learn to be capable of and what they achieve through effort. That which is in man but cannot be learned or worked at is called nature; that which is in man and can be learned and achieved through effort is called acquired effort. This is the distinction between nature and acquired effort." He thus concluded: "It is clear that man’s nature is evil; his goodness is the result of acquired effort." Although Xunzi believed that "the nature of man is such that he is born with a love of profit," he nonetheless proposed the path of moral cultivation where "the sage transforms nature and initiates acquired effort, and from acquired effort ritual and righteousness are born." While Xunzi's advocacy for improving human morality through education and regulations shares common ground with Confucianism, his stance that human nature is evil contradicted the Confucian position of original goodness and was thus critiqued by the later Orthodox Tradition (道统, daotong). Zhu Xi ^[10] believed that "Xun Qing [Xunzi] is entirely like Shen and Han" ^[11]. Cheng Yi believed: "Xunzi is extremely biased and erroneous; with only the sentence 'nature is evil,' the great foundation is already lost."

With the Orthodox Tradition’s critique of Xunzi’s theory of original evil, the "theory of original goodness" advocated by Mencius became the mainstream of Chinese theories of human nature for the following 2,000 years, thereby becoming the primary human nature basis for "advocating benevolence." Mencius’s theory of original goodness focused on the essential distinction between humans and animals, emphasizing the moral nature of being human; Xunzi’s theory, on the other hand, was based on the biological commonalities between humans and animals to reveal human nature. The fundamental bases of their arguments were different. The theory of original evil in Western traditional culture also argues for human nature from biological instinct, which possesses its own theoretical rationality. However, from the moral dimension of being human, the advocacy of original goodness is more conducive to the ethical requirements of "advocating benevolence." Thus, the view that human nature is inherently good was easily accepted, leading to the inference that "being human" (人, ren) is synonymous with "being benevolent" (仁, ren).

(3) The Methodological Foundation of "Extending Oneself to Others"

As for how to advocate and promote benevolence, "extending oneself to others" (推己及人, tui ji ji ren) is the best practical principle. This thought originated with Confucius, who first understood himself from the perspective of observing human nature. The Analects records: "Zi Gong asked, saying, 'Is there one word which may serve as a rule of practice for all one’s life?' The Master said, 'Is it not "reciprocity" (恕, shu)? What you do not want done to yourself, do not do to others.'" "Reciprocity" refers to deducing one’s attitude and behavior toward others from one’s own position. There is a passive element here: not imposing on others what one dislikes. In the process of promoting benevolence, Confucius also proposed an important principle, which is "loyalty" (忠, zhong). The Analects records: "The Master said, 'Shen [Zengzi], my way is permeated by a single thread.' Zengzi replied, 'Yes.' When the Master left, the other disciples asked, 'What did he mean?' Zengzi said, 'The Way of our Master is simply loyalty and reciprocity (忠恕, zhongshu).'"

Shuowen Jiezi ^[12] explains: “Zhong (loyalty) means reverence. It is derived from the radical for heart (xin), with ‘middle’ (zhong) serving as the phonetic component.” Duan Yucai’s commentary adds: “Exerting one’s heart to the utmost is called zhong.” Zhu Xi interpreted zhong as “exhausting oneself” (exerting one’s best efforts) and shu (empathy/reciprocity) as “extending oneself.” This “exhausting oneself” is what Confucius meant by: “The person of ren (humaneness/benevolence), wishing to be established themselves, seeks also to establish others; wishing to be prominent themselves, seeks also to make others prominent. To be able to judge others by what is near to oneself can be called the method of achieving ren.” This concept—that in establishing oneself one should let others stand, and in advancing oneself one should let others advance—is “extending oneself to others” in a positive sense. From a methodological perspective, “extending oneself to others” means comparing one’s own heart to another’s, putting oneself in their shoes, and shifting perspectives. That is, one knows how to avoid “inhumane” acts by looking from one’s own perspective, while also knowing how to promote the realization of “benevolent love” by standing in the position of others.

Mencius inherited Confucius’s idea of “extending oneself to others,” stating: “That by which the ancients greatly surpassed others was nothing else than this: they were good at extending what they did.” That is, “Treat with the reverence due to age the elders in your own family, so as to extend it to the elders of others; treat with the kindness due to youth the young in your own family, so as to extend it to the young of others.” This is essentially “taking this heart and applying it to those others,” expanding one's own virtuous nature and benevolent heart to other people and society. Consequently, the Western Jin Confucian Fu Xuan summarized: “Thus, the person of ren is one who extends themselves to others.” Zhang Zai also remarked: “To love others with the heart used to love oneself is the height of ren,” and “The Way of ren has a foundation; it begins with an analogy to one's own person, and extending this to others is its method.” Zhu Xi noted: “What is applied through shu is the application of one’s love; without shu, though there be love, it cannot reach others,” and “Scholars, regarding zhong and shu, cannot avoid comparing themselves with others and extending themselves to others.” These all involve applying the methodological principle of extending oneself to others in the process of “upholding benevolent love,” thereby driving the transformation from merely speaking of benevolence to practicing it. The establishment of the theoretical foundation for upholding benevolent love provided a solid root for the development and praxis of this thought.

II. The Historical Evolution of “Upholding Benevolent Love”

In the historical development of Chinese traditional culture, “upholding benevolent love” is one of the most significant traditions. The Book of Documents records phrases such as “I am as humane as my ancestors” and “Even if one has many close relatives, they are not equal to a person of ren,” marking the emergence of the concept of ren. In the Zuo Zhuan, the character ren appears 33 times, associating it with “not turning one’s back on one’s roots.” In the Analects, ren is mentioned as many as 109 times, which sufficiently illustrates its importance. Throughout the long river of history, the tradition of “upholding benevolent love” has been passed down like a torch, and its conceptual connotations have been continuously enriched and deepened as the eras evolved.

(1) The Initial Formation of Benevolent Love Thought

As an excellent cultural tradition of the Chinese nation, the spirit of benevolent love is centrally manifested in reverence for life, respect for others, and the pursuit of the Way of Goodness. This spirit is not only a vital component of traditional Chinese moral culture but also the cultural source and spiritual bedrock that forged the character of friendliness, kindness, and peace within the Chinese nation. The interpretations of “benevolent love” by the various Pre-Qin schools mark the formation of this thought and the beginning of “upholding benevolent love.”

The Daoists ^[13] differed from the Confucians; they spoke of ren more in the sense of “goodness” (shān) and “compassion” (cí), while opposing hypocritical “benevolence and righteousness” (rényì). Laozi believed: “The Sage has no constant heart; he takes the heart of the people as his own. To those who are good, I am good; to those who are not good, I am also good; thus, virtue is goodness.” This means the Sage has no selfish heart but takes the will of the people as his own. Therefore, he advocated: “I do nothing and the people transform themselves; I love stillness and the people correct themselves; I take no action and the people become rich; I have no desires and the people become simple.” The Daoist advocacy of “governance through non-action” (wúwéi ér zhì) was not an opposition to “doing,” but rather an opposition to disordered actions that violated natural laws. The Daoists approved of “virtuous benevolence” that conformed to human and heavenly nature, while opposing the hypocritical “benevolence, righteousness, and wisdom” that transcended human nature. They maintained that only by discarding false benevolence and righteousness could the common people return to their authentic filial piety and compassion—i.e., “Abandon sageliness and discard wisdom, and the people will benefit a hundredfold; abandon benevolence and discard righteousness, and the people will return to filial piety and compassion; abandon skill and discard profit, and there will be no thieves.” Simultaneously, Laozi believed it was precisely because the Great Way (Dào) was abandoned that hypocrisy, benevolence, and righteousness appeared; and only when the six family relations were in discord would there be a demand for filial piety and compassion—i.e., “When the Great Way falls into disuse, there are benevolence and righteousness; when wisdom and intelligence appear, there is great hypocrisy; when the six relations are not in harmony, there are filial piety and compassion; when the state is in disorder, there are loyal ministers.” While Laozi held a critical attitude toward “benevolent love” as a social norm, his “upholding benevolent love” in the sense of championing the goodness of non-action and natural benevolence still possesses value.

The theory of “love of self” advocated by the Daoist Yang Zhu also originated from Laozi’s Way of Nature. Yang Zhu opposed Mozi’s “impartial love” and advocated for “valuing life” and “prioritizing the self,” emphasizing the preservation of individual life. Although no specialized treatise by Yang Zhu has survived, his thoughts appear in the “Yang Zhu” chapter of the Liezi, annotated by Zhang Zhan of the Eastern Jin. According to the record: “Qinzi ^[14] asked Yang Zhu: ‘If you could aid the whole world by plucking out a single hair from your body, would you do it?’ Yang Zhu replied: ‘The world is certainly not something to be aided by a single hair.’ Qinzi said: ‘Suppose it could be aided, would you do it?’ Yang Zhu did not answer. Qinzi went out and told Meng Sunyang. Meng Sunyang said: ‘You do not understand the Master’s heart. Let me explain. If by scarring your skin you could gain ten thousand pieces of gold, would you do it?’ Qinzi said: ‘I would.’ Meng Sunyang asked: ‘If by cutting off a limb you could gain a kingdom, would you do it?’ Qinzi was silent for a while. Meng Sunyang said: ‘A hair is smaller than skin, and skin is smaller than a limb; that is clear. Yet hairs accumulate to form skin, and skin accumulates to form a limb. A single hair is one part among ten thousand in the body; how can one treat it lightly?’” And: “The ancients would not have given a single hair to benefit the world, nor would they have taken the whole world to serve themselves. If every person does not harm a single hair, and every person does not benefit the world, the world will be well-governed.”

From this, we see that Yang Zhu’s thought cannot be simply dismissed as extreme egoism. From the fragments of his thought, we can see its profundity: namely, that all individuals have their own rights; that a person can and should master their own destiny without being controlled by others; and that society cannot rely on sacrificing the interests of one group to fulfill those of another. However, Mencius clearly failed to see the profound side behind Yang Zhu’s thought, seeing only its “self-interest” and “selfishness,” and thus opposed the school of Yang Zhu. Mencius believed: “Yang Zhu’s principle was ‘each for himself.’ Though he might have benefitted the whole world by plucking out a single hair, he would not have done it.” And: “Mr. Yang’s ‘each for himself’ amounts to denying one's sovereign; to have neither father nor sovereign is to be a beast.” Due to Confucian opposition to Yang Zhu, the idea of self-love failed to become the mainstream of traditional culture. Yet one should not negate the significance of self-love and valuing the self because of this. From the perspective of intellectual history, the advocacy of self-love and valuing the self, like the concept of upholding benevolent love, is an important component of traditional Chinese moral culture.

Confucius, the founder of Confucianism, explicitly proposed the idea of “upholding benevolent love.” Confucius believed: “To restrain oneself and return to the rites (li) constitutes ren. If for one day one could restrain oneself and return to the rites, all under heaven would turn to ren.” Therefore, to achieve ren, one must first “cultivate the self” (xiūshēn): “If the will be set on ren, there will be no practice of wickedness.” The concrete manifestation of ren is “love”: “Fan Chi asked about ren. The Master said: ‘It is to love others.’” Thus, “benevolent love” became the moral quality most esteemed and emphasized by Confucians. As for how to achieve benevolent love, Confucius advocated starting from “filial piety and fraternal duty” (xiàotì)—starting from “loving one's parents” to cultivate ren, which is “extending oneself to others.” Yet Confucius did not let “upholding benevolent love” remain solely at the level of blood relations; he pushed “love for parents” toward “love for others” and “broad love for the masses.” “A youth, when at home, should be filial, and, abroad, should be fraternal; he should be earnest and truthful. He should overflow in love to all (fàn ài zhòng), and cultivate the friendship of the good.” In expanding benevolent love, Mencius, like Confucius, emphasized moving from the intimate to the distant and from the near to the far, advocating that “love has gradations” and “application begins with one’s kin.” Mencius believed: “Affection for one’s parents is ren,” “The person of ren leaves no one unloved, but they make the urgency of affection for the worthy their primary task,” and “The junzi ^[15] is kind to animals but not humane (ren) toward them; he is humane toward the people but not affectionate (qin) toward them. He is affectionate to his parents and thus humane to the people; he is humane to the people and thus kind to things.” Regarding the ten thousand things (nature), the junzi loves them but has not reached the level of ren; toward the people, the junzi treats them with a heart of ren, while “benevolent love” is extended from the intimate to the distant—to other people, and from loving people to loving all things. It can be said that this cognitive paradigm and behavioral norm of “extending oneself to others” is the most effective method for an individual to achieve virtuous deeds and moral excellence.

Unlike the Confucians, the Mohists ^[16] believed that “upholding benevolent love” required “universal mutual love” (jiān xiāng ài) and opposed the idea that love has gradations. Jian means “simultaneous” or “altogether”; “universal love” (jiān'ài) is a universal, undifferentiated love—that is, loving all people without regard for distinctions. “Therefore, looking at his friend, he feeds him when hungry, clothes him when cold, nurses him when sick, and buries him when dead. The words of the ‘universalist’ are like this, and his actions are like this.” Conversely, the words of the “partisan” are: “How can I care for my friend’s person as I do my own? How can I care for my friend’s parents as I do my own?” Consequently, seeing his friend, he does not feed him when hungry or clothe him when cold—this is a manifestation of “un-benevolence.” Mozi called the Confucians, who advocated graded love, “partisans” (biéshì, literally “differentiators”) and believed their position could never achieve a true love for all people. Thus, Mozi advocated replacing specific “differentiated love” with universal “universal love,” believing that “universality is benevolence and righteousness.” Mozi’s thought on universal love contained elements of universal fraternity and represented the consciousness of the lower classes striving for equality. However, because he “upheld benevolent love” from the perspective of “universal love,” his thought became overly idealized, turning into a moral fantasy that could not be realized in the society of that time. To this end, Mencius, as a representative of the “partisans,” countered the Mohist critique and continued to insist that love has gradations. While recognizing that at the time “the words of Yang Zhu and Mo Di [Mozi] fill the world; the talk of the world goes either to Yang or to Mo,” he also acknowledged Mozi’s personal character, noting: “Mozi loved universally; if by wearing himself out from head to heel he could benefit the world, he would do it.” Yet he opposed the Mohist doctrine, arguing: “Mr. Mo’s universal love amounts to denying one’s father.” Mencius, Book 3A, also records an intellectual clash between Mencius and the Mohist disciple Yi Zhi: “Yi Zi said: ‘According to the Way of the Confucians, the ancients acted as if they were protecting a newborn babe. What does this mean? I take it to mean that love has no gradations, though its application begins with one’s parents.’ ... Mencius said: ‘Does Yi Zi truly believe that a man loves his brother’s child as much as he loves his neighbor’s newborn? ... When a newborn is crawling toward a well, it is not the newborn's fault [and anyone would save it]. Furthermore, Heaven, in giving birth to creatures, has made them to have one root, whereas Yi Zi makes them have two roots.’” Mencius believed that a passerby saving a baby from a well was not proof that love has no gradations, but rather a result of the “heart of compassion” (cèyǐn zhī xīn); a person’s love for their own nephew and a neighbor’s child is certainly different—this is graded love. Mencius's critique of the Mohists, on one hand, revealed the theoretical flaw of “universal love” in ignoring human ethical distinctions, and on the other hand, once again demonstrated the feasibility of the Confucian idea of “upholding benevolent love.”

(2) The Enrichment and Development of Benevolent Love Thought

The Confucian thought of “upholding benevolent love,” through the interpretations of Han and Tang scholars and its development into the Neo-Confucianism of the Song and Ming dynasties, further became the most important conceptual framework in traditional Chinese culture.

In the Han dynasty, Dong Zhongshu ^[17] emphasized upholding benevolent love, believing: “The person of ren is pained by the suffering of others and loves them; they are cautious and non-contentious... they have no heart to harm, no intent of concealment or taboo, no air of jealousy... and no treacherous deeds.” However, Dong Zhongshu attributed the interpretation of “upholding benevolent love” to “Heaven,” emphasizing that “the beauty of ren lies in Heaven; Heaven is ren,” and used the theory of “interaction between Heaven and mankind” (tiānrén gǎnyìng) to explain ren. Although Dong Zhongshu’s theory—that “the Three Bonds of the Kingly Way can be sought in Heaven”—established an ontological basis for “benevolent love,” it was not highly esteemed by later Confucian scholars. The Tang dynasty Confucian Han Yu, in his essay The Origin of the Way (Yuán Dào), proposed: “Universal love is called ren; acting as is appropriate is called righteousness (yi); proceeding from these is called the Way (Dao); being self-sufficient without depending on the external is called virtue (de).” Extending benevolent love to “universal love” (bó'ài) was both an inheritance and a development of Confucian thought, providing a reference and inspiration for Song and Ming Neo-Confucians to rethink the upholding of benevolent love.

Building on the foundations laid by Han and Tang scholars, Song and Ming Neo-Confucianism proposed that “ren is the principle of life/growth” (shēng). They believed that individuals must deeply reflect on their own moral cultivation to connect with the life-order of the universe, thereby manifesting the meaning of human existence. Thus, the “upholding of benevolent love” in Song-Ming Neo-Confucianism contains both an affirmation of the primordial state of human life and an ultimate pursuit of the perfected realm of human existence. Zhang Zai believed: “Heaven embodies things and leaves nothing out, just as ren embodies affairs and is nowhere absent.” And: “Nature is the single source of the ten thousand things; it is not something I can claim for my own selfish use. Only the Great Man can exhaust its Way; therefore, in standing he seeks to let all stand; in knowing he seeks to know all; in loving he loves universally; in succeeding he does not succeed alone.” Benevolent love is not only the unity of Heaven and humanity; to achieve harmony between man and the Mandate of Heaven, one must seek the good and pursue ren. On this basis, he proposed the concept of “people as my siblings and things as my fellows” (mín bāo wù yǔ), while insisting on starting from “differentiated love” before extending to “universal love”: “To desire to give broadly and assist the masses, expanding this to all under heaven and applying it without end, one must have the talent of a Sage to broaden the Way.” Cheng Hao and Cheng Yi also believed that the growth of the ten thousand things is...

Regarding "benevolence" (仁, ren): "The vitality of all things is most worth observing; this origin is the chief of goodness, and this is what is called benevolence." For a human to act with benevolence is to align with the "Way" (道, dao); that is, "Benevolence is principle (li). Humans are material things (wu). When benevolence is unified within the human body, it constitutes the Way of Man." Furthermore, Cheng Yi ^[18] opposed Han Yu's ^[19] view that "universal love is what is called benevolence," arguing that "love" cannot be simply equated with "benevolence." He distinguished between the two, positing that benevolence is the original substance (ben-ti) or "nature" (xing), while love is the function (yong) or "emotion" (qing). That is: "The Way of benevolence can be summarized simply as the word 'impartiality' (gong). Impartiality is merely the principle of benevolence; one must not call impartiality itself benevolence. When impartiality is embodied by a human, it becomes benevolence. Because of impartiality, things and the self are both illuminated; hence benevolence leads to the capacity for empathy (shu ^[20]) and the capacity for love. Empathy is the application of benevolence, and love is its function." Cheng Yi's categorical division between substance and function in the concept of "benevolent love" (ren'ai) re-established the ontological status of benevolence.

Building on this, Zhu Xi ^[21] noted: "Benevolence is the heart of Heaven and Earth that gives birth to all things," and "the meaning of giving birth is benevolence." He further stated: "Benevolence is the virtue of the heart and the principle of love. Righteousness (yi) is the regulation of the heart and the appropriateness of affairs." The core of benevolence is "affection for kin, benevolence toward the people, and love for all things—these three are the affairs of benevolence. Affection for kin is the first task." He continued, "From affection for kin, one moves to benevolence toward the people; from benevolence toward the people, one moves to love for all things. This love has gradations, and its application has a sequence; thus the Way of benevolence generates life unceasingly." Clearly, Zhu Xi still advocated for gradations in love (ai you cha deng).

Wang Yangming ^[22] also believed that "the Great Person’s ability to form one body with Heaven, Earth, and the myriad things is not a matter of intentionality, but because the benevolence of their heart is inherently so." While Wang advocated for loving "the myriad things," he also held that there are degrees of proximity and distance when practicing "benevolent love." He remarked: "One loves both animals and plants. Yet if one uses plants to feed animals, can one bear it? One loves both humans and animals. Yet if one slaughters animals to nourish parents, provide for sacrifices, or entertain guests, can one bear it? One loves both kin and strangers. Yet if there is but a bowl of rice and a plate of soup—if one gets it, they live; if not, they die—and one cannot save both, then one saves the kin rather than the stranger. Can one bear it? This is as the Principle (li) ought to be." He further explained: "By treating my father as a father, then other people's fathers, then the fathers of all under heaven, my benevolence truly forms one body with them; only after forming one body does the 'illustrious virtue' of filial piety become clear!" and "The love between father and son or among brothers is the starting point of the heart’s vital impulse, like the budding of a tree. Moving from here to benevolence toward people and love for things is like growing the trunk, branches, and leaves. Mozi's ^[23] 'universal love without gradations' treats one's own father and son like people on the road, which erases the starting point; without a bud, one knows there is no root. If it is not 'generating life unceasingly,' how can it be called benevolence? Filial piety and fraternal respect are the roots of benevolence because the principle of benevolence grows out from within them."

The Confucian emphasis on moving from the near to the far and maintaining gradations in love cannot be simply equated with a theoretical defense of the blood-based patriarchal clan system, nor should it be reduced to an ideological tool serving the ruling class. Compared to "universal love" (jian'ai) which relies on conviction and will, or "philanthropy" (bo'ai) which relies on faith and institutions, the Confucian "differentiated love" was more feasible under the historical conditions of the time. For example, in modern society, the rescue of "strangers" can be undertaken by social organizations or charitable institutions; however, in ancient society where social mechanisms were imperfect, the Confucian practical wisdom of "extending from oneself to others" was more effective at solving relief problems than vague slogans of "universal love." From the pre-Qin to the Song and Ming dynasties, Confucians primarily explored how to "observe benevolence" from an individual perspective. They did not oppose the beauty of "universal love" or "philanthropy" and advocated loving all things; they simply believed that the realization of beautiful ideals must be pragmatic and take human nature into account. Only with sequential gradations can love truly be implemented.

(3) The Modern Transformation of Benevolent Love

With the development of the times and the Enlightenment, "observing benevolence" underwent new trends and conceptual transformations in the modern era ^[24]. Gong Zizhen ^[25] recognized the importance of individual interests within social change and developed a deeper understanding of self-love and partiality. He believed that "Heaven has its partialities" and "Earth has its partialities." He poignantly asked: "The sagely emperors and wise queens issued grand decrees and labored in the fields or sighed in the temples, as recorded by historians. But if one investigates the reality of their actions, was it not merely to protect their own descendants and preserve their own state? Why did they not love others' states but loved their own? Why did they not protect others' descendants but protected their own? Furthermore, the sorrow of loyal ministers, the tears of filial sons, and the chastity of widows—all recorded in history and poetry—why is the minister not loyal to another's ruler but to his own? Why is the son not filial to another's parents but to his own? Why does the chaste widow not give her body to the public market, but keeps it private and preserved for herself?" At the same time, he inherited the Confucian idea of "observing benevolence," hoping rulers would implement "benevolent governance" (renzheng): "Let the benevolent heart be the substance, manifested in governance."

Kang Youwei ^[26] argued that the realization of "benevolence" is limited by social conditions and that "universal love" can only be achieved in an egalitarian society. That is: "In an Age of Disorder, benevolence cannot reach far, so one only loves kin; in an Age of Rising Peace, benevolence reaches one's peers, so one can be benevolent to all people; in the Age of Great Peace, all living beings are as one, thus one can universally love all things." Tan Sitong ^[27], inheriting Confucian thought, proposed a highly innovative "Theory of Benevolence" (renxue), advocating for equality between self and others, and between self and things. He believed "Benevolence is the function of the Ether ^[28], by which Heaven, Earth, and the myriad things are born and connected," and "the manifestation of this connection is equality." The reflections of Enlightenment thinkers on "observing benevolence" reflected the transformation and innovation of traditional thought under the context of national salvation.

"The study of benevolence was unveiled by Confucius and brought together East and West by Tan Sitong. It has remained unbroken for two thousand years." Observing benevolence and "establishing oneself to help others establish themselves" is not only a core element of several millennia of fine traditional Chinese culture but also the cultural bedrock for the original aspiration of Chinese Communists for over a century. In his speech at the ceremony marking the 100th anniversary of the founding of the Communist Party of China, Xi Jinping pointed out: "As soon as it was born, the CPC established its original aspiration and founding mission as seeking happiness for the Chinese people and rejuvenation for the Chinese nation." For over a century, the CPC has remained committed to seeking progress for humanity and the Great Harmony (datong) ^[29] for the world. This is both a contemporary practice of the idea of "observing benevolence" and a relentless effort toward its creative transformation and innovative development.

III. The Rich Inner Core of "Observing Benevolence"

The thought system of "observing benevolence" formed throughout the long history of Chinese civilization still possesses positive contemporary value in the New Era. Systematically elucidating the deep connotations of this tradition and promoting its innovative development plays a vital role in inheriting the spirit of benevolence. "Observing benevolence" integrates the essence of various schools of traditional Chinese thought; it is at once the marrow of traditional Chinese morality, the core of Chinese culture, a practical reflection of the CPC's century-long quest for the people's happiness, and—in the New Era—an important innovation of the governing philosophy of Chinese-path modernization.

(1) From the Individual Perspective: "Observing Benevolence" Requires "Universal Love for All Living Things"

As a primary connotation, "universal love for all living things" (fan'ai qunsheng) advocates for cherishing life and caring for others and the myriad things. First, it includes the ethical foundation of "self-love." The "self" is a member of the "multitude" (qun); to love others, one must first know how to love oneself. The Daoist view that "the sage knows himself but does not show himself; loves himself but does not prize himself," the Mohist view that "loving oneself is not for the sake of being a person who loves himself... love has no degrees of thickness," the Confucian view that "the wise make others know them, the benevolent make others love them," Wang Anshi's "loving oneself is the beginning of benevolence, which can be extended to loving others," the Ming dynasty scholar Qiu Jun's "the greatness of the world is the accumulation of individuals; if everyone gets their share and fulfills their wishes, the world will be at peace," and Huang Zongxi's ^[30] "at the beginning of life, everyone was for themselves and their own profit"—all these prove the importance of valuing individual life and interests. Only when individuals understand their own needs, cherish their own lives, and achieve moral awakening can they truly stand on the ground of "Man" (being "Benevolence") to reason through relationships between people, society, and nature.

In the New Era, the CPC consistently adheres to the principle of "Life First" (shengming zhishang) for the masses. It maintains that "human life is the most precious... 'Life First' embodies the deep benevolent tradition of the Chinese people and the people-centered value pursuit of Chinese Communists." This is the inheritance and development of benevolent thought today. Second, the specific requirement of benevolence is "loving one's kin" (aiqin). "Is not filial piety and fraternal respect the root of benevolence?" By extending love from oneself to family, one learns to respect the elderly, care for the young, and be a good neighbor. Third, this extends to "loving others" (airen), including friends and strangers. "The benevolence of the one is not as beautiful as the benevolence of the family; the benevolence of the family is not as beautiful as the benevolence of the neighborhood." "Benevolence toward others" is also an important source of "friendliness" (youshan)—one of the Socialist Core Values. Finally, it includes "loving the myriad things," including animals and the environment. Confucius required "fishing but not with a net, and not shooting birds at rest," and Mencius argued that "a gentleman, regarding animals, seeing them alive, cannot bear to see them die." Xi Jinping places great emphasis on ecological civilization, stating: "'All things live in harmony and grow with nourishment.' Chinese civilization has always emphasized the unity of Heaven and Man and respect for nature."

(2) From the Collective Perspective: "Observing Benevolence" Requires "The Benevolent Person Loves Others"

This advocates mutual assistance and finding joy in helping others (zhu ren wei le). With the development of the division of labor, benevolence has become a moral requirement for professional groups. First, for those in governance, it requires "governing with virtue" and "loving the people as one's own children." Xi Jinping has repeatedly instructed Party members and cadres on the building of clean government, emphasizing that they "must take the strengthening of moral cultivation as a vital compulsory course in life, consciously drawing nutrition from fine traditional Chinese culture... and winning the people's hearts through the power of morality." This is the contemporary manifestation of benevolent thought in the New Era. Second, for educators, benevolence means caring for and protecting students. Han Yu's On Teaching (Shi Shuo) states: "A teacher is one who passes on the Way, imparts professional knowledge, and resolves doubts." Only with a heart of benevolence can a teacher truly succeed in cultivating the morality and character of their students.

On September 9, 2014, in a speech during a symposium with representatives of faculty and students from Beijing Normal University, Xi Jinping pointed out: "To be a good teacher, one must have a benevolent heart. Education is a career of 'being benevolent and loving others' ^[31]. Love is the soul of education; without love, there is no education. A good teacher should be a benevolent teacher; a person without a heart of love cannot become a good teacher." On September 9, 2023, in a letter to representatives of outstanding teachers nationwide, Xi Jinping listed "a benevolent heart of joy in teaching, love for students, and a willingness to contribute" as a requirement of the "educator spirit," hoping that the vast number of teachers would promote and practice it. This further illustrates the importance of a "benevolent heart" for professional ethics in teaching. Finally, for medical practitioners, "upholding benevolence" requires a "healer’s benevolent heart" (yīzhě rénxīn). Sun Simiao wrote in his book Essential Formulas for Emergencies [Worth] a Thousand Pieces of Gold ^[32]: "When seeing the suffering of others, feel as if it were your own; feel a deep sorrow in your heart... devoid of desires or demands, first develop a great heart of compassion and empathy, and vow to save all sentient beings from their suffering." In the early Qing dynasty, the traditional Chinese medicine scholar Yu Chang also advocated: "Medicine is a benevolent art; benevolent people and gentlemen must be profound in their feelings." A doctor's duty is to heal the wounded and rescue the dying; without a benevolent heart, one cannot fulfill this duty. On March 6, 2021, in a speech while visiting medical, health, and education sector members attending the Fourth Session of the 13th National Committee of the Chinese People's Political Commission (CPPCC), Xi Jinping pointed out: "The vast number of medical workers must abide by medical ethics, medical conduct, and the medical way; they must cultivate medical virtue, practice benevolent arts, harbor a heart for rescuing those in suffering, and be 'great physicians for the common people' (cāngshēng dàyī), striving to provide more high-quality and efficient health services for the masses." Moreover, for advanced groups in various industries, "the benevolent person loves others" is also manifested as a spirit of dedication and sacrifice. The Analects: Wei Ling Gong requires that "men of high purpose and benevolent men will not seek to live at the expense of benevolence, but will even sacrifice their lives to achieve benevolence" ^[33]. Mencius: Gaozi I posits: "Life is what I desire; righteousness is also what I desire. If I cannot have both, I will choose righteousness over life." For people of high purpose and benevolence, "upholding benevolence" means choosing to "sacrifice one's life for righteousness" (shěshēng qǔyì) without hesitation when the interests of the people and the state are threatened, using one's own life to defend the dignity and interests of the people and the nation. Since its founding, the Communist Party of China (CPC) has led the Chinese people with a "dauntless spirit that 'our minds grow stronger for the martyrs' sacrifice, daring to make the sun and moon shine in new skies' ^[34]," writing the most magnificent epic in the thousands of years of the Chinese nation's history. In the New Era, a large number of advanced Party members, ethical role models, and heroic groups who act bravely for a just cause have emerged. With their sentiment of loving the people and njihov courage to face difficulties and sacrifice, they vividly interpret the spiritual realm of "selfless great love" pursued by the principle that "the benevolent person loves others."

(3) From the perspective of the state, "upholding benevolence" requires "taking the people as the foundation"

First, from the perspective of national governance, upholding benevolence means recognizing that "the people are the foundation of the state." The Book of Documents: Song of the Five Sons contains the warning: "The people are the sole foundation of the state; when the foundation is firm, the state is at peace." The Analects: Xue Er requires a ruler of "a state of a thousand chariots" to "be reverent in business and sincere, economical in expenditures and loving of the people, and employ the people in the proper seasons." Mencius: Jinxin II contains the judgment: "The people are the most important, the altars of the soil and grain [the state] come next, and the ruler is the least important." Mencius: Lilou I argues: "Without a benevolent government, the Way of Yao and Shun cannot be used to peacefully rule the world." Xunzi: On Military Affairs advocates: "He who loves the people will be strong; he who does not love the people will be weak." Mozi: Universal Love III hopes that "the old who have no wives or children may have support to finish their years; the young and weak orphans who have no parents may have someone to rely on to grow to adulthood." Jia Yi, in his New Book (Xīnshū), proposed the requirement: "Regarding governance, there is nothing that does not take the people as the foundation. The state takes them as the foundation, the ruler takes them as the foundation, and the officials take them as the foundation." Cheng Yi pointed out in his Memorial Responding to the Imperial Edict on Behalf of Lyu Huishu: "The way of governance takes following the will of the people as the foundation, enriching the people’s livelihood as the foundation, and ensuring peace without disturbance as the foundation." The concepts of "practicing benevolent government" and "taking the people as the foundation" in traditional culture stayed primarily on the issue of "the people's livelihood" (mínshēng). Due to social and historical limitations, "upholding benevolence" did not become a universal reality, and even the most basic issues of livelihood were not properly resolved due to the constraints of the economic and political systems. Since its founding, the CPC has upheld the purpose of serving the people wholeheartedly, always putting the interests of the people first. It has not only solved the livelihood problem of "becoming prosperous" (fù qǐlái) but also realized whole-process people's democracy in politics. It can be said that the establishment of the socialist system not only solved the livelihood problem of "taking the people as the foundation" materially but also solved the democratic problem of "the people are the foundation of the state." The report to the 20th CPC National Congress pointed out: "We must adhere to the people-centered development philosophy. We must maintain the fundamental interests of the people, improve their wellbeing, and ensure that development is for the people, relies on the people, and its fruits are shared by the people, so that the achievements of modernization benefit all people more fairly and equitably." At the same time, it stated: "All power in the state belongs to the people," and we must "uphold the principal position of the people, fully reflect the people's will, protect the people's rights and interests, and stimulate the people's creative vitality." These are not only the inheritance of the ideas of loving and enriching the people from "benevolent government," but also an innovative development of the idea of "taking the people as the foundation" in national governance based on the "Second Combination" ^[35].

Furthermore, regarding interactions between states, the advocacy of "taking the people as the foundation" through benevolent government also helps promote peace and development in the international community. The core of "practicing benevolent government" is also to oppose war and advocate for peace to protect the lives and interests of the common people. Mencius: Lilou I argues: "When the struggle for territory leads to war, the dead fill the fields; when the struggle for a city leads to war, the dead fill the city. This is what is called leading the land to eat human flesh. Such crimes cannot be atoned for even by death." In 2013, during a keynote speech at the Boao Forum for Asia, Xi Jinping said: "China will persist in being a good neighbor and a partner to its neighbors, consolidate friendly relations with neighbors, deepen mutually beneficial cooperation, and strive to make its own development better benefit neighboring countries." This is because "being benevolent and friendly to neighbors is a tradition handed down in China since ancient times." In the New Era, "to let the torch of peace be passed from generation to generation, the engine of development be provided with inexhaustible power, and the light of civilization shine brightly—this is the expectation of the people of all countries and the responsibility that the politicians of our generation should undertake. China's solution is: building a community with a shared future for humanity and achieving win-win cooperation and sharing." Upholding benevolence means seeking "the world as one family," advocating for peace, friendliness, harmony among all nations, and the "Great Unity" (Tiànxià dàtóng) ^[36], and longing for a beautiful world where "the public way prevails for all" ^[37]. These concepts provide the ideological foundation for the construction of a community with a shared future for humanity.

The idea of "upholding benevolence" in traditional Chinese culture has continuously evolved through the long river of history. Today, through creative transformation and innovative development, it has become the norms and criteria for regulating the harmonious development of relations between people, between people and objects, between people and society, and between states. In the New Era, the fine tradition of "upholding benevolence" will provide a rich historical foundation for advancing the construction of Chinese-path modernization. Therefore, it is still necessary to deeply excavate and promote the ideological essence of "upholding benevolence" to gather spiritual strength for the realization of the Chinese Dream.