Geography Reference
In-Depth Information
Mo-ism, or the school of Mo Di (fl. 479-438 B.C.), was a manifestly
religious system of thought. Confucianism, Taoism, and even Legal-
ism had one thing in common: they were not very religious. Its major
figure, Mo Di, is known in Chinese intellectual history as Mozi, or
“Master Mo.” Mozi was a devoutly religious man who argued that
the ills of the Eastern Zhou time came from not being religious
enough. He argued forcefully that “ghosts and spirits” do exist and
that human beings owe them acknowledgement and respect:
The people give themselves up to evil, violence, thievery, and rebel-
lion, using weapons, knives, poison, fire, and water to assault inno-
cent persons on the roads and byways and seize their carriages and
horses, robes and furs, for their own benefit. All of these conditions
come about for the same reason, and as a result the world is in
disorder.
Now why do we have this state of affairs? It all comes about because
people are in doubt as to whether ghosts and spirits exist or not, and do
not realize that ghosts and spirits have the power to reward the worthy
and punish the wicked. If we could only make all the people in the
world believe that the ghosts and spirits have the power to reward the
worthy and punish the wicked, then how could there be any disorder
in the world? (Watson 1963, 94)
Although Mozi was not opposed to ritual per se, he deplored ritual
extravagance and excess and often associated it with Confucianism.
He also had a great reverence for Heaven and believed that it did inter-
vene in human affairs. For him, however, Heaven was more personal
than it was for the Confucians or Taoists. It was not a mere abstraction
or operative principle of the universe. He also preached a teaching he
called “universal love,” or love applied equally to all human beings
without regard to hierarchy or familial relation. According to Mozi,
people should love other people's parents, families, and countries as
much as their own. He argued at considerable length that if people re-
ally did love everyone equally, there would be no crime or aggression
or campaigns against other states:
Great states attacking small ones, great families overthrowing small ones,
the strong oppressing the weak, the many harrying the few, the cunning
deceiving the stupid, the eminent lording it over the humble—these are
harmful to the world
...
When we inquire into the cause of these various harms, what do we
find has produced them? Do they come about from loving others and
trying to benefit them? Surely not! They come rather from hating others
