The Mandate of Heaven and Confucianism

An artists depiction of the emperor before his advisors.

China was ruled by a series of dynasties, or royal families, for more than 3,500 years,
dating back to 1500BC. Each of these dynasties possessed varying levels of national power
and control; each also contributed some measure of social, cultural or religious influence on
China. One of the more influential was the Han dynasties, who reigned from the late 3rd
century BC until 220AD; among their other changes Han emperors introduced and
expanded Confucianism, a philosophy that would permeate and in some respects define
Chinese society and government until the revolution. Another significant dynasty was the
Tang (618-907AD) which made significant advances in the arts, technology and foreign
trade. The Ming dynasty (1368-1644AD) has become synonymous with its cultural artefacts,
especially its high quality porcelains and works of art however Ming emperors also
oversaw a growth in commerce, foreign contact and territorial expansion. While each of
these dynasties ruled through different periods of history and employed different policies
and ideas, one common element defined them: each was bound bytianming, or the
Mandate of Heaven.
One who managed to wrest the throne by force gained Confuian sanction for his rule. As
the proverb put it bluntly: He who succeeds is a king or marquis; he who fails is an
outlaw The relative openness of the system stood in stark contrast to that of other
imperial orders. In China, political challengers be they peasants or foreign invaders
were permitted to make a bid for kingship through popular rebellion.
Elizabeth J. Perry, historian


The Mandate of Heaven is an Asian variation of what students of European history might
known as the Divine Right of Kings. Much as in medieval Europe, ancient Egypt and other
long-gone civilisations, the authority to rule and to govern China was granted to emperors
from above. However the Mandate of Heaven differed from the Divine Right of Kings in
three respects. Firstly, unlike Christianity, Chinese religion was not monotheistic; the
Chinese did not believe in one omnipotent god but in a number of minor gods, mythical
figures, heroes and ancestors. The Mandate of Heaven was therefore granted by a
supernatural community rather than a single godhead. Secondly, the Mandate of Heaven
could be conferred upon any individual from any strata of society; the emperor did not have
to be of royal or noble birth, he only had to be fit to rule. Thirdly and most significantly, the
Mandate of Heaven held the emperor accountable to certain standards; he was indirectly
answerable to the Chinese people. If the emperor and his regime failed to meet their
responsibilities, mistreated the people or abused their power, their authority to rule could be
withdrawn. Signs that Heaven had withdrawn its mandate could include natural disasters
such as floods, droughts, famines or pandemics. Peasant rebellions could also be
construed as evidence that the emperor had lost the support of the gods, as explained by
Pro-ching Yip:

As a matter of historical fact, all peasant uprisings and changes of dynasty were
staged and carried out in the name of the will of heaven. It transpires that tianming
means destiny, i.e. orders or instructions from heaven and geming revolution [both
imply] the transferring of orders or instructions from heaven, taking the mandate
from one ruler to give it to another. The ancient Chinese believed that intervention
from heaven in terms of the heavenly mandate might take various forms. If heaven
was angry, there could be floods, droughts and other natural disasters which would
immediately affect the livelihood of an agricultural society. A supernatural being was
believed to be behind all these doings and undoings.


An artists impression of the Chinese scholar Confucius
The Mandate of Heaven was integrated with and reinforced by the teachings of
Confucianism. This social and political philosophy was derived from the writings of Chinese
scholar Confucius or Kong Fuzi, who lived between 551BC and 479BC. Most Confucian
philosophy is drawn from the Analects, a compilation of his ideas, sayings and teachings
compiled after Confucius death. Confucianism is sometimes considered a religious, though
that is only partly true: it is also a philosophical guide to personal behaviour and success,
social harmony and effective government. Confucianism urges individuals to show respect
to their elders and concern for those beneath them. Obedience, loyalty to ones family and
ancestors, dutiful service and good manners are expected at all times. The sayings
attributed to the philosopher stereotyped and parodied in the West as Confucius say
also reflect the Confucian concern for careful consideration, lateral thinking, good
judgement and self-improvement.

The teachings of Confucius invited attention from the West and were translated into Latin
Confucian ideas were integrated into Chinese politics and society during the Han dynasty,
particularly during the long reign of Emperor Wu (ruled 141BC to 87BC). Wu was an
enthusiastic patron of Confucianism: he ordered both the education and examination
systems to incorporate the study of Confucian texts, while scholars and officials who
refused to embrace Confucianism were marginalised. It soon became very difficult, if not
impossible, to progress in the Han bureaucracy without a Confucian education, which only
increased the expansion of Confucianism among ordinary Chinese. Han emperors had an
obvious agenda in their sponsorship of Confucianism, which encouraged loyalty, obedience,
self-discipline and respect for hierarchies. But Confucianism also shaped political values as
much as it protected them. Confucianism was not merely a passive tool of government,
wrote Xinzhong Yao. It functioned, to a considerable extent, as a watchdog for ruling
activities. By the 1800s, the last century of the Qing dynasty, classical Confucianism had
been replaced by neo-Confucianism, which integrated elements of Buddhist and Taoist
religious philosophy. Nevertheless this hybrid form of Confucianism was embedded in
Chinese socio-politics, while Confucius himself had been elevated to the status of an
intellectual hero.
The Mandate of Heaven and The Great Ming Code
JIANG YONGLIN
$30.00S PAPERBACK (9780295993430) ADD TO CART
$70.00X HARDCOVER (9780295990651) ADD TO CART
PUBLISHED: October 2010
SUBJECT LISTING: Asian Studies, Law
BIBLIOGRAPHIC INFORMATION: 256 pp., notes, glossary, bibliog., index, 6 x 9 in.
TERRITORIAL RIGHTS: World
SERIES: Asian Law Series
CONTENTS

After overthrowing the Mongol Yuan dynasty, Zhu Yuanzhang, the founder of the Ming dynasty (1368-
1644), proclaimed that he had obtained the Mandate of Heaven (Tianming), enabling establishment of
a spiritual orientation and social agenda for China. Zhu, emperor during the Ming's Hongwu reign
period, launched a series of social programs to rebuild the empire and define Chinese cultural identity.
To promote its reform programs, the Ming imperial court issued a series of legal documents,
culminating in The Great Ming Code (Da Ming l), which supported China's legal system until the Ming
was overthrown and also served as the basis of the legal code of the following dynasty, the Qing
(1644-1911).

This companion volume to Jiang Yonglin's translation of The Great Ming Code (2005) analyzes the
thought underlying the imperial legal code. Was the concept of the Mandate of Heaven merely a tool
manipulated by the ruling elite to justify state power, or was it essential to their belief system and to
the intellectual foundation of legal culture? What role did law play in the imperial effort to carry out
the social reform programs?

Jiang addresses these questions by examining the transformative role of the Code in educating the
people about the Mandate of Heaven. The Code served as a cosmic instrument and moral textbook to
ensure "all under Heaven" were aligned with the cosmic order. By promoting, regulating, and
prohibiting categories of ritual behavior, the intent of the Code was to provide spiritual guidance to
Chinese subjects, as well as to acquire political legitimacy. The Code also obligated officials to obey
the supreme authority of the emperor, to observe filial behavior toward parents, to care for the
welfare of the masses, and to maintain harmonious relationships with deities. This set of regulations
made officials the representatives of the Son of Heaven in mediating between the spiritual and
mundane worlds and in governing the human realm.

This study challenges the conventional assumption that law in premodern China was used merely as
an arm of the state to maintain social control and as a secular tool to exercise naked power. Based on
a holistic approach, Jiang argues that the Ming ruling elite envisioned the cosmos as an integrated
unit; they saw law, religion, and political power as intertwined, remarkably different from the
"modern" compartmentalized worldview. In serving as a cosmic instrument to manifest the Mandate of
Heaven, The Great Ming Code represented a powerful religious effort to educate the masses and
transform society.

Jiang Yonglin is visiting associate professor of East Asian studies at Bryn Mawr College. He is the
translator of The Great Ming Code (Da Ming lu).

"As translator of The Great Ming Code, the author is uniquely qualified to undertake this reassessment
of Chinese law. Using Western misconceptions of Chinese law as his springboard, Jiang offers a fresh
look at the Ming code and Chinese legal philosophy that emphasizes cosmology. This book is one of
the best contemporary works on Chinese legal history." -Thomas Buoye, University of Tulsa
REVIEWS

"For students interested in these and other questions concerning Chinese law or religion in the late
imperial period, Jiang's learned study should be an obvious starting point." -Leo K. Shin, Journal of
Chinese Religions

"This book is a very important contribution to the field of Chinese legal history . . ." -Par Cassel, Vol.
17:4, 2010

"The book is a necessary correction to the conventional views [that Chinese law was irrational, entirely
secular, and an instrument of state control] . . . the book remains a welcome addition to the literature
on traditional Chinese law." -Ziaoqun Xu, Frontiers of History in China, 7(1), 2012

"Arguing against a scholarly tradition that sees Chinese law as a purely secular instrument of despotic
power, Jiang Yonglin seeks to place that tradition in the context of a China-centered Chinese history. .
. . a learned and thoughtful work." -Michael Marme, Journal of Asian Studies, February 2012