Ren and Confucius

 There are many religions that talk about the humanitarian characteristics us homosapiens posses that allow us to differ from the rest of the animal kingdom. These characteristics have been isolated and given great importance in many of the eastern and western religions, in which Confucianism follows ensuite. The idea of ren is used in representation of good ideal humanistic qualities. Essentially the ideas behind ren have existed for many years before Confucianism but it was Confucius who cemented expectation for ren to be followed by everyone and not just nobility. (Amore/Ching, 449)(Slingerland, 106)

Ren in Confucian religious philosophy refers to aspects that can be used to define a being as “fully human”, thus ren denotes the characteristics of goodness, empathy, benevolence and consideration.(Amore/Ching, 449) These characteristics are thought to allow one to be cultured and civilized.(Cheung/Chan 57) The importance of ren in Confucianism can be clearly seen when we look at the legacy of the founder of Confucianism, Confucius himself.(Amore/Ching, 449) Confucius is known for teaching the virtue of ren, a word that is written with a component of ‘human’ and ‘two’ or ‘above’, essentially meaning proper behavior between people.(Amore/Ching, 449)

We can draw from the generic meaning of ren, representing proper behavior between people, to signify the pivotal importance of ren in the ‘Five Relationships’ that act as the center of the Confucian ideology. The ‘Five Relationships’ that are depicted in Confucianism are the relationships held between ruler and minister, father and son, husband and wife, elder and younger brothers, and friend and friend.(Amore/Ching, 449) Ren can only be cultivated or followed only when these relationships are present and these relationships work such that ren does not exist without the relationships and vice versa.(Slingerland, 105) We can see that the idea of ren directly ties in with the Confucian belief of non-self rather a mutual identity based on others when we look at the dependence of ren on social relationships with others and thus we can gain a selective appreciation for the virtue of ren.  

Li, translated most often as ‘ritual propriety’ in terms of social behaviour is another virtue presented by Confucius.(Amore/Ching, 449) This virtue of li is essentially the ‘etiquette’ or ‘morals’ with which one would interact with aspects of this world ranging from people and nature to material objects.(Slingerland, 114)(Herr, 471-473)  Thus the concept of ren essentially encompasses certain aspects of li; proper ren is thus only present when li is accompanying it. Moral etiquette in Confucianism is imperative in all aspects of relationships one would have with another implying the connotation of ren and in turn implying the significance of li.

The concept of ren has always been vital to the functioning of good government systems in China and the east.(Chan, 292) The concept of ren currently provides the basis for many social welfare systems in both the east and the west, as it is ideal since the concept of ren  focuses not on the self but on the righteous and moral relationships that one has with others.(Herr, 474) The only downfalls that can be seen in such a social welfare system headed by the concept of ren lies with the fact that Confucianism denies the fact of self, which is not only impractical in today’s society but also restricts the social freedom that one may have under such a social welfare system.(Herr, 142-145) In a sense communism can even be alleged to follow the concepts of ren in such a nous that it too focuses more on the wellbeing of the whole instead of the one and gives great important to the relationships that the citizens have among themselves, depicting all to be equals. Social welfare deals not only with the prospective good it can do for a state but also with the fairness under which the system pursues, and this aspect among many of the aspects that deal with justness and moral equality is taken care of by the Confucian concept of ren and thus a contemporary social welfare system would function quite efficiently off the concept of ren.(Herr, 472,476-489)

It has often been said in Confucius ideology and even in the ideas withheld by those before Confucius, that it is a ‘gentleman’ that adheres to ren. Before Confucius only nobility were expected to withhold the virtue of ren as they were expected to be generous to all those that were thought to be inferior to them. Only after Confucius was the idea of equality in the sense of status considered, and ranking or status in the sense of society was decided by the ones intellect and morality. Thus it gave a clear opening for all to be ‘gentlemen’. We can see that the high idealistic nature of being a ‘gentleman’ allured many from the rich to the poor to begin following the concepts of ren to become that socially ideal person drawing respect from others around them and returning that respect fulfilling the guidelines of ren. This in turn would have created a better balanced righteous and well functioning society.  This in combination with a just welfare system can support a justly ordered human society, in which the central concept of ren regulates the system. As Herr acknowledges such a society would be idealistic similar to how such a welfare system would be idealistic, and thus can lead to disappointment and aggravation when any aspect of the system fails.(Herr, 174)

In essence ren was and is an important part of righteous society, since it deals fundamentally with relationships which tend to affect and shape the thoughts and actions of each individual or under Confucian thought defines each individual. Although the morals and strict hierarchical ideas of ren may not be followed stringently, the general idea of ren still remains important for all aspects of society to function properly.

Works Cited

Amore and Ching. “Confucianism And Daoism.” A Concise Introduction To World Religions. Eds. Willard G.

Oxtoby and Alan F. Segal. Toronto, Ontario: OXFORD University Press, 2007. 448-450

Chau-kiu Cheung and Andrew Chi-fai Chan, “Philosophical Foundations of Eminent Hong Kong Chinese

Edward Slingerland, “Virtue Ethics, the "Analects," and the Problem of Commensurability”