Individual Autonomy and Responsibility in Late Imperial China By ...

And if everybody is buddha, then Buddha never had to save any living creature. If there is no such a phenomenon of all living creatures [to be cared for], why worry for people [to be saved]? Then, if there is no phenomenon of a moral truth [ to be revealed], why worry about the phenomenon of self?⁴⁰ Without the illusion of self, self-renounce is possible. Without [the phenomenon of] people [to be saved], then I can follow others. There is no forcing: once we understand that everyone is buddha, and goodness is the same we share with everybody, then goodness is common to all people. How can this good be only in myself? As I and others share the same goodness, how is it possible it belongs to one person from whom I cannot learn? ⁴¹

Here the negation of self seems to follow the Buddhist meaning of the false illusion of individuality (wu wo xiang 無我相) as well as giving up one’s way (sheji 舍己) as described by Mencius (Gongsun Chou I). Li undoubtedly finds a good argument in Buddhist language, and Mencius’s praise for the great king Shun offers him another famous case. Li Zhi’s target is Confucian moralist orthodoxy embodied in Geng’s “hypocrisy.” In the same letter, Li Zhi goes on explaining that self-renouncing is the acknowledgement that truth and morality do not belong exclusively to oneself or one’s opinions. Then, this negation of the individual and self is neither a merely metaphysical question nor a warning against desires and selfishness. It would be in contradiction to Li’s concept of the “natural self” (tongxin 童心) and the self-motivated nature of human beings. It aims at practically attacking any orthodoxy as the foundation of intolerance. The model comes from the legendary king Shun who “regarded virtue as the common property of himself and others, giving up his way and prejudices to follow that of others.”⁴²

Goodness is inside the human being, and one can learn from it. We can learn from everybody, peasants, potters, fishers, and moreover, we can draw from every one of the many sages and saints. Why should we follow only Confucius to be in the right