| Chapter 6: | New and Old Elements on the Centrality of Self |
|
|
This is a limited free preview of this book. Please buy full access.
Rites and social practices are not metahistorical rules that have been abstractly imposed ever since antiquity.41 The practices that came to be widely accepted are those that fit individual tastes and do not clash with the genuine and “natural self” (zhenji 真己). In contrast, as Li Zhi himself explains, “all rituals which are felt to be artificial and imposed from outside, are then to be considered inhumane” 從外而入者，謂之非禮.42 As demonstrated in another of his writings, Li was also well aware of the ambiguity of any interpretative operation (jie 解):
Scriptures are both explicable and inexplicable. Explication facilitates the surface comprehension of meaning, but you also get ensnared in words. When you explain, you cannot settle on a single definition, which is tantamount to not having any definitions whatsoever. Not having any definitions is like the beads of a rosary, nothing is impossible. Explication is settling on a single explanation, but then you lapse into cliché (siyu 死語). Clichés are like a stamp being imprinted on plaster. What possible use do they have?43
A further illustration of the centrality of the individual in this period comes from the semantic reformulation of some basic categories related to the traditional polarities “emotions-desires” (qing 情) and principles (li), “infatuation-foolishness” (chi 癡) and “wisdom” (zhi 智), “personal-egoism” (si 私) and public (gong).44
This late Ming trend recalls a previous period in Chinese cultural history, as it was marked by “freedom, Romanticism of nature, and madness,”45 and was characterized by the growth of eccentric circles. Yu Yingshi talks about the period from the end of the second century to the end of the fourth century as an age of individualism which flourished in reaction to the alleged collectivism of the Han Dynasty (206 BC–220 AD), with the crisis of the “Three Bonds” in the setting of monarch-subject and family relationships, as well as the breakdown of Confucian ritualism.46 In addition, Yu mentions some phenomena he considers consistent with these developments; they include the renewed interest in characterology, the increased attention toward psychological enquiry, and the transition