Islamic Ethics and the Controversy about the Moral Heart of Confucianism

摘要

This essay briefly evaluates the ongoing controversy between LIU Qingping and GUOnQiyong (and their followers) about the “moral heart” of Confucianism in order to draw ancomparison with Islamic ethics for mutual illumination of the two traditions (see Guo 2007:n21). Liu argues that Confucianism is basically consanguinism and, as such, it lands into ann“embarrassing paradox” in its moral thinking when dealing with conflicts between filialnpiety and brotherly love on the one hand and public good on the other. It also lands in an“profound paradox” when it comes to extending family love to humanity in general becausensuch extension is impossible without a universalistic human love (Liu 2007). Guo contestsnthis view and insists that the root of morality in Confucianism is not family love but ourn“moral heart/mind,” endowed by “Heaven” with universal human love. Filial piety is onlynthe “root of practice” of this universal human love and not the root of all morality.nTherefore, Confucianism has all the resources for a universalistic ethics and it is “thennatural order” of the practice of human love to start with parental and brotherly love (Guon2007). This controversy revolves particularly around Analects 13.18, where Confucius talksnabout fathers and sons covering up for each other, and Mencius 7A35 and 5A3, wherenMencius talks about King Shun leaving his empire and running away to help his fathernescape punishment for murder (7A35) and giving princely status to his murderous brothern(5A3). Liu challenges Mencius’s presentation of Shun as a great hero, sage-king, ofnConfucian tradition because these cases point toward public corruption by Shun in the namenof filial piety and brotherly love. Guo, however, defends Mencius’s position as underliningnthe need, per traditional Confucian culture, for “grace” rather than “righteousness” in thenprivate sphere of life, and also as protecting family love as the “root of practice” fornuniversal human love. These two opposing interpretations can be pictured as follows:*There is a natural order of flow (of water, so to speak) from the source/root to the first pool and onwards.nAlso there is a moral priority and superiority belonging to each preceding column (Guo 2007: 28, 29).n**Parents and relatives need not be criticized frankly for minor faults. They need not be followed blindlyneither and can be remonstrated only pleasantly. While righteousness rules the public domain, in privatenmatters involving relatives, one has to follow grace (Guo 2007: 26).