which construes the body as a container of the self or a property owned by the self; hence the expression ‘having a body.’ In contrast, shen bespeaks a phenomenology of ‘being a body.’ […] Synonymous with the self, the body is at once a hidrance to and a means of deliverance.”

20. Sommer, “Boundaries of the Ti Body,” 304. Note Sommer’s comments on the plant analogies with ti body for family relations and commonality (309–324).

21. Ames, “The Classical Chinese Self and Hypocrisy,” 226; Hall and Ames, Thinking From the Han, 23–43, 273–280; Ho (“Selfhood and Identity in Confucianism, Taoism, Buddhism and Hinduism,” 116–117) discusses a “relational self” with a “relational identity” based on a relationship dominance.

22. Santangelo, “Human Conscience and Responsibility in Ming-Qing China,” 31–80, and the second part of this volume. A similar argument is made by Chen Ning (“The Concept of Fate in Mencius,” 495–520) who debates the issue of personal autonomy versus fate: “Mencius was talking about the ultimate determinant of human physical satisfaction and moral fulfilment. The reason why the gentleman does not speak of human biological nature is that the degree to which one can obtain what one physically desires is determined by the power of fate, far beyond human control. The reason why the gentleman does not speak of moral decree is that one’s moral nature plays a more important role in the course of fulfilling the moral task than does the decree as such. Ming as a decree is from Heaven, yet its fulfilment depends on people’s own efforts” (501). Sense of autonomy of the self is found in some statements in Yijing commentaries such as “The influence of the world would make no change in him” (不易乎世), and “he can experience disapproval without trouble of mind” (不見是而无悶); note also Qian 乾 and Chujiu 初九 in the metaphor of the hidden dragon (qianlong 潛龍). Even the debated formula “To subdue one’s self and return to propriety” (keji fuli 克己復禮)  “Is the practice of perfect virtue from a man himself, or is it from others?” (為仁由己，而由人乎哉？Lunyu, Yan Yuan 顏淵, 1). Translations from and references to Lunyu (Analects) and Mengzi (Mencius) are all based on The Chinese Classics by James Legge. On “centripetal self,” and “centrifugal self,” see Shulman and Stroumsa, Self and Self-Transformation in the History of Religions, 13.

23. Chen Xunwu, “The Ethics of Self.”

24. Xunzi, Zhengming 正名, 18–19.

25. Hsiao Kung-chuan, A History of Chinese Political Thought, 619.