Filial piety
From Free net encyclopedia
In Confucian and Buddhist thought, filial piety (Chinese:孝 ; Mandarin: Xiào; Cantonese: Haau) is one of the virtues to be cultivated: a love and respect for one's parents and ancestors.
In general terms, filial piety means to take care of one's parents; not be rebellious; show love, respect and support; display courtesy; ensure male heirs; uphold fraternity among brothers; wisely advise one's parents; conceal their mistakes; display sorrow for their sickness and death; and carry out sacrifices after their death.
Filial piety is considered as first virtue among Chinese people, and a large number of stories are about it. The most famous one is The Twenty-four Filial Exemplars (二十四孝). Twenty-four story depicts how children exercised their filial piety in the past. While China has always had a diversity of religious beliefs, fillial piety was common to almost all of them. Hugh D. R. Baker has referred to respect for the family as the only element common to almost all Chinese believers.Template:Ref In the Han Dynasty, and other eras, traditions such as ancestor worship were also sometimes enforced by law upon all of the emperor’s subjects. With those who did not obey being subject to corporal punishment.
Contents |
In Confucianism
However, for Confucius, xiào was not merely blind loyalty to one's parents. Above the norm of xiào were the norms of rén (Chinese (仁) (benevolence) and yì (義) (righteousness). For Confucius and Mencius, xiào was in fact foremost a display of rén and should ideally be applied in one's dealings with all elders, thus making it a general norm of intergenerational relations. In reality, however, xiào was usually reserved for one's own parents and grandparents and was often elevated above the notions of rén and yì.
In Chinese Buddhism
In India, Buddhism also advocated celibacy among its monks. Celibacy was a concept foreign and unacceptable to other forms of Chinese thought as it was viewed as the child's duty to continue the parental line.Template:Ref
"I tell you, monks, there are two people who are not easy to repay. Which two? Your mother and father. Even if you were to carry your mother on one shoulder and your father on the other shoulder for 100 years, and were to look after them by anointing, massaging, bathing, and rubbing their limbs, and they were to defecate and urinate right there [on your shoulders], you would not in that way pay or repay your parents. If you were to establish your mother and father in absolute sovereignty over this great earth, abounding in the seven treasures, you would not in that way pay or repay your parents. Why is that? Mother and father do much for their children. They care for them, they nourish them, they introduce them to this world. But anyone who rouses his unbelieving mother and father, settles and establishes them in conviction; rouses his unvirtuous mother & father, settles and establishes them in virtue; rouses his stingy mother and father, settles and establishes them in generosity; rouses his foolish mother and father, settles and establishes them in discernment: To this extent one pays and repays one's mother and father." ( AN II.31 ) Template:Ref
When Buddhism was introduced to China, it was redefined to support filial piety. The Mouzi Lihuolun (牟子理惑論), a work defending Buddhism to the Chinese, presented arguments for Buddhist monks'seemingly poor treatment of their parents by closely reading the works of Confucius himself. The Mouzi compares the Buddhist monk to a son who saves his father from drowning by grabbing him and lifting him upside down back into the boat. Grabbing and holding one's parents upside down is certainly not standard conduct, but because it is for the greater good of the parent it should be allowed. If he had not violated rules of respectfulness, his father would have drowned. Confucius allowed for these emergencies by allowing that filial piety must adapt it self to existing circumstances. The behaviour of a Buddhist monk is similar. While, on the surface the Buddhist seems to be rejecting their parents and abandoning them, in fact the pious Buddhist is aiding their parents as well as himself towards salvation. The Mouzi also attempted to counter charges that not having children was a violation of good ethics. It was pointed out that Confucius himself had praised a number of ascetic sages who had not had children or family, but because of their wisdom and sacrifice were still perceived as ethical by Confucius. The argument that Buddhist filial piety concerns itself with the parent’s soul is the most important one. The same essential argument was made later by Sun Ch'o: he argued that Buddhists monks, far from working solely for their own benefit, are working to ensure the salvation of all people and aiding their family by so doing.Template:Ref Hiuyuan continued this reasoning, arguing that if one member leaves the household to be a monk then all other members of the family will benefit from good fortune and lead superior lives.
These philosophical arguments were not entirely successful in convincing the filial Chinese that the behaviour advocated by Buddhism was correct, and less subtle methods were also employed. To more directly give Buddhism a filial nature passages and parables that were of minor importance in Indian and Central Asian Buddhism became very prominent in Chinese Buddhism. The story of Shan-tzǔ (Syama in Sanskrit), is an example of this. Shan-tzǔ spends his entire life aiding his blind parents until he is eventually accidentally killed, but because of his life of filial devotion he is miraculously revived. This story became often mentioned in the Chinese canon of Buddhist writings. It is included in a number of different anthologies, such as the Liudu Jijing, and referred to by other Chinese Buddhist writers.Template:Ref While it is clearly of Indian origin, this tale is virtually indistinguishable from one a Confucian would recount. While it was transmitted along with Buddhist writings, philosophically it has very little to do with traditional Buddhism.
Another story advocating filial piety is that of Mu-lien, a Buddhist monk who goes to great lengths to rescue his mother from condemnation for her unjust life. This story appeared in the Yulanpenjing and it is far more relevant to Buddhism than the tale of Shan-tzǔ. It was still not a particularly important tale in Indian Buddhism. In China, however, these stories became not just elements of Buddhist scripture but also popular tales told amongst even non-Buddhists. While these tales were part of the Buddhist tradition, Chinese Buddhism raised them from a peripheral to a central role. Another tale that rose to great prominence in China was that of the Buddha rising to heaven for three months after his enlightenment to preach and teach to his mother his new philosophy. This tale was used indicate that the Buddha did indeed show proper concern and respect for his parents, in that he cared for their immortal souls.
A number of apocryphal texts were also written that spoke of the Buddha's respect for his parents and the parent child relationship. The most important of these, the Sutra on the Weighty Grace of Parents, was forged early in the T'ang dynasty. This Sutra has the Buddha making the very Confucian argument that parents made great sacrifices and put great efforts into ensuring wellbeing for their child, and that the child must repay this kindness with loyalty and respect. This forgery was accepted as accurate by generations of scholars and commoners and it played an important role in the development of a fully Chinese variation of Buddhism. Other documents discussing the Buddha’s views on the parent child relationship were also probably forgeries. The Sutra on a Filial Son also sounds far more Chinese than Indian and shows the influence of Confucianism.
Notes
- Template:Note Baker, pg. 98
- Template:Note Traylor, pg. 110
- Template:Note Zurcher, pg. 134
- Template:Note Ch'en, pg. pg. 23
- Template:Note Thanissaro Bhikkhu http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/anguttara/an-02-031-tb0.html
References
- Baker, Hugh D. R. Chinese Family and Kinship. New York: Columbia University Press, 1979.
- Ch'en, Kenneth. The Chinese Transformation of Buddhism. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1973.
- Traylor, Kenneth L. Chinese Filial Piety. Bloomington: Eastern Press, 1988.
- Zurcher, E. The Buddhist Conquest of China. Leiden: E. J. Brill., 1959