Across the Philosophical Silk Road PDF

Across the Philosophical Silk Road A Festschrift in Honor of A l fredo P. Co the blooming of a hundred flowers philosophy of ancient china Alfredo P. Co I Volume University of Santo Tomas publishing...

Across the Philosophical Silk Road A Festschrift in Honor of A l fredo P. Co the blooming of a hundred flowers philosophy of ancient china Alfredo P. Co I Volume University of Santo Tomas publishing house españa, manila Copyright © 2009 by Alfredo P. Co and the University of Santo Tomas All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the publisher. Cover design by Robbie Villegas Book design by Bong Bundang Photo by George Ang The typeface used for the text is Arno Pro with headings in ITC Esprit Bold. Chapter titles are in Optima. Hardbound: Text set in 12.5 points in 7”x10” Lux Cream, 80 gms with jacket in C2S 100 lbs. in four colors. Limited Edition. Softbound: Text set in 12.5 points in 7”x10” Bookpaper, 50 lbs. with cover in foldcote 12 in four colors. Published by the UST Publishing House University of Santo Tomas, España, Manila 1008, Philippines Telefax: (632) 731-3522 Recommended entry: Co, Alfredo P. Across the philosophical silk road: a festschrift in honor of Alfredo P. Co / Alfredo P. Co. – Manila : UST Publishing House, c2009. xl, 438 pp ; 25.4 cm ISBN: 978-971-506-533-7 (hardbound) ISBN: 978-971-506-532-0 (softbound) 1. Philosophy. 2. Philosophy, Ancient. I. Title : The blooming of a hundred flowers : philosophy of Ancient China. II. Title. B29.C63 2009 Co, Alfredo P., “What is to Philosophize?,” in Across the Philosophical Silk Road: A Festschrift in Honor of Alfredo P. Co, Vol. 1 (Manila: University of Santo Tomas Publishing House, 2009), 1-5. Introduction WHAT IS TO PHILOSOPHIZE? E arly attempts to write a universal definition of philosophy failed be- cause mankind never shared a common idea of what it is. Is it valid to define philosophy as the science of beings, of their ultimate causes or principles as known by the light of natural reason? Perhaps so, but then, what would happen to Existentialism or Indian philosophy? Existentialism is not interested in the problem of the ultimate principles; neither is Indian philosophy concerned with the truth arrived at by the light of natural reason. Shall we then define philosophy as the individual’s quest for authentic existence, or as the search for the Ultimate Being by the use of one’s intuitive faculty? But what would happen to Chinese philosophy whose main interest is to know how man can live in harmony, unity, peace, prosperity, if in- deed, perpetuity! Should philosophy then be defined as a way of life? But then those who believe that it is a way of thought could easily reject it! It seems that behind the many definitions, whatever degree of validity each one has, rests a more fundamental question: What is to philosophize? Man is a universal phenomenon. He cogitates, contemplates and interprets the same world and yet he comes up with varied opinions regarding it. History has indeed shown us that the diversity of human experiences has created diversified cultures that have brought about distinct interpretations of the world. The complex enterprise of philosophizing has been a monopoly of man ab initio. God, being omniscient, has no need for either reason or intuition in order to know. He is the Repository of truth and the Fountainhead of wisdom. The angels possess a natu- ral knowledge of God and know other things by merely contemplating their angelic es- sence. The brutes do not philosophize for their sentient level simply cannot allow them  the blooming of a hundred flowers: philosophy of ancient china to do so. Only man can and needs to philosophize because of his uncertainties, which manifest themselves as doubts. Therefore, we may say that philosophy be- gins and ends with man. We see in the history of ideas, how man tried to construct philosophical ideas, and how others tried to destroy them. One system of thought is raised and another system of thought refutes it. Generally, to philosophize means to theoretically consider all things in a study or reflection. But philosophizing is a complex process of thought. The history of humanity has shown how man has struggled to come up with a genuine, indig- enous world-view. Through the different periods of history, he has used his natural powers to pursue various philosophical ends. I see generally three ends, namely: the Knowledge of the Absolute Truth; the Knowledge of the Reasoned Truth; and the Knowledge of the Practical Truth or what is also known as the Knowledge of the Art of Living. These different ends were curiously pursued by three great civilizations: the Indian, the Greek and the Chinese. The Indians asked the question “Who am I?” The Greeks inquired, “Where am I?” Lastly, the Chinese posited the question “What am I?” The Jews also asked such significant questions as “Where did I come from?” and “Where am I going?” But since man’s knowledge of his origin and des- tiny cannot be verified, we shall not classify these questions as philosophical. In all these questions, there is the encompassing I, which only proves the reflective nature of philosophizing. The Indian philosophical tradition is deeply rooted in the question, “Who am I?” For the Indian forest sages, the Absolute Truth consisted in man’s discov- ery of the Self. The famous dialogue from the Twelfth Khanda of the Chandogya Upanishad between Udalaka Aruni and his son Svetaketu depicts quite vividly this intuitive search for the Absolute. Aruni said; Fetch me from thence a fruit of the nyagrodha tree. Svetaketu replied: “Here is one, Sir.” “Break it.” “It is broken, Sir.” “What do you see there?” “These seeds, almost infinitessimal.” “Break one of them.” “It is broken, Sir.” “What do you see there?” “Not anything. Sir.” The father said: “My son, that subtle essence which you do not perceive there, of that very essence this great nyagrodha tree exists.” “Believe it, my son. That which is the subtle essence, in it all that exists has its self. It is the True. It is the Self, and thou, o Svetaketu art it.” 2  introduction In the same text, the Absolute Truth is revealed as the discovery of the Self that is identical with the spirit of the universe. The Atman and Brahman are one. It is through this realization that man achieves emancipation from all forms of il- lusions or Maya. “By the old age of the body, the ether does not age; by the death of the body, the ether is not killed. That is the true Brahman. In it all desires are contained. It is the Self, free from sin, free from old age, from death and grief, from hunger and thirst, which desires nothing but what it ought to desire, and imagines nothing but what it ought to imagine. Those who depart from hence without having discovered the Self and those true desires, for them there is no freedom in all the worlds. But those who depart from hence, after having discovered the Self and those true desires, for them is freedom in all the worlds.” The highest truth in Brahman can only be known if man is to consciously withdraw from the world of the senses, and methodically suspend the activity of his reasoning intellect in order to give way to the inner faculty of intuition. The Absolute Truth can only be attained by the use of his intuitive faculty. Philosophy for the Indians is the science of the Absolute Truth as known by the use of one’s intuitive power. In this subtle and mystical search for the “depth ego,” the Indi- an sage probed into the ageless, deathless, spiritual identity of man. This psychocentrism is the distinguishing mark of Indian philosophy. But the Indians were great psychologists. Patanjali of Nyaya philosophy, Mahavira and Gautama - were they not in fact great psychologists and spiritual leaders? Early Greek philosophical inquiry started with the question “Where am I?” Amazed by the phenomenon of change, the pre-Socratic cosmologists com- menced their philosophical speculation with a search for the unifying principle of the universe. For them truth consisted in man’s understanding of the principles be- hind the workings of the spatio-temporal world and his relationship with it. Thus, we have Thales claiming that Water was the ultimate World-Stuff; Anaximander, declaring it was the Boundless, and formulating his theory of evolution; Anaxi- menes, Air; Heraclitus, Fire; Parmenides, the One; Pythagoras, the Limited and the Unlimited; Empedocles, Earth, Air, Water and Fire; and Anaxagoras, Infinitely- Various Seeds. They were great cosmologists. The Greek attachments to the spatio-temporal world prompted them to de- velop a peculiar science reflective of such a spirit of inquiry. Thus, the Greeks in- vented the science of Logic and Epistemology, where truth is attained by a success- ful use of syllogistic demonstrations. The clarity of truth rests in the philosopher’s ability to define a concept and one’s security rests in his ability to insulate himself in these clearly -and neatly demonstrated discourses of reason. For the Greeks, philosophy is the science of the logico-epistemic truth attained by the use of man’s 3  the blooming of a hundred flowers: philosophy of ancient china natural reason. The Chinese philosophical enterprise was based on the question, “What am I?” The Chinese were interested in the discovery of what it meant to be human - what man’s potentialities were and how man could live in self-determination, har- mony and cohesiveness with others, in righteousness and propriety, sincerity and wisdom, peace and prosperity, so that he might be able to live in perpetuity. The ancient Chinese masters focused their attention on the problem of making man humane. The question “What am I” is indeed socio-politico-moral. The anthro- pocentric slant of the Chinese thinkers made them great social thinkers, political thinkers and moral thinkers. No other civilization has invested so much of its phi- losophizing on the problem of attaining the highest moral good within the reach of men than the Chinese. They have thought out, preached and lived their answers to the problems of practical life that is the birthmark of their “princely sages.” Chinese philosophy attempts to come up with explanations for the knowl- edge of practical wisdom drawn out of man’s moral growth in life’s experience. The richness of this Truth on the Art of Living is measured on the basis of how that practical wisdom is able to enrich man as an individual and as an integral part of society. Philosophy then for the Chinese is the science of practical truth attained by the use of practical reason. Were not the first Chinese masters moral, social and political philosophers? We have; Kong Zi, Lao Zi, Zhuang Zi, Meng Zi, Shang Yang, Xun Zi to name a few. Thus, we have seen that philosophizing, traditionally speaking, could mean: a methodic exercise of the faculty of intuition (with the use of mantra, concen- tration or meditation) for the transcendental grasp of the Absolute; a methodic exercise of the faculty of reason (with the use of logical paradigm) for the attain- ment of ontological or epistemic truths; or the methodic exercise of practical rea- son (based on life’s experience) for the practical ability of man to live in dignity as a moral person. The nobility of traditional philosophizing rests in the thinkers’ sincerity, ex- haustiveness and originality in their approach to their philosophical end. Philoso- phers following these three ancient traditions are nothing but footnotes as far as their end and the use of their faculty are concerned. The 18th and 19th centuries saw the cross-cultural contact among these three ageless traditions. Philosophical works of various cultures were translated and people started to see things from different lights. The initial experience was shattering and even abhorrent. It was not surprising that G.W.F. Hegel failed to see philosophy in the East and with, sardonic pride, declared flatly that philosophy was a monopoly of the West! It was Schopenhauer who saw the wisdom in Indian thought and Leibniz who perceived the superiority of Chinese moral wisdom. Re- 4  introduction gretably, Schopenhauer saw the wisdom of Indian thought but failed to experience the light; while Leibniz appreciated the moral Truth of the Art of Living but failed to experience its beauty, righteousness, humanity and decorum. We have said enough on the distinctions of the three philosophical currents in ancient culture. We herein proceed to investigate the philosophical tradition that has greatly influenced the thinking of the East – the Chinese philosophical tra- dition. Quite expectedly, going into the study of the philosophy of ancient China is likened to opening a new vista of thought that will require enormous patience, attention and open-mindedness. As we embark on the study of the different minds that helped shape a whole civilization, we may yet find the secret that made it en- dure the tests of time. 5