Legal idealism of pre-Qin Confucians: tracing the ideas of Confucius, Mencius, and Xunzi

1 The characteristics of pre-Qin Confucian legal thought

Ru-jia (the Confucian School) is China’s most influential system of thought, being born in the Spring and Autumn period and growing into a leading school in the Warring States period. The school of thought was rejected by Emperor Qin Shihuang, who outlawed and burned most of its classics. That was the hardest time for the school before it was rehabilitated in the Han dynasty and became the mainstream thought of imperial China for centuries, until the end of the last imperial dynasty of Qing, even though many scholars professed that pre-Qin Confucian thought was the basis of their philosophy. Several new strands of Confucian thought (known as neo-Confucianism) have been established since Han claimed that they had origins in pre-Qin Confucian thought and were the descendants of Confucius, despite differing markedly from the original Confucians. The original Confucians, underpinned by the belief that humans were born good, promoted an idealistic society in which the goodness of human nature could be brought out through educational transformation (jiaohua). The optimistic idealist perspective of the pre-Qin Confucians stood in contrast to the neo-Confucians, who instead, after incorporating other pre-Qin schools of thought into their own systems of thought, believed that human nature could be either good or evil. The neo-Confucians were devoted largely to the concerns of realpolitik.^[1]

The reason why we consider pre-Qin Confucian legalism to be like what we call legal idealism today is that the founder of the school, Confucius, and his well-known follower Mencius both had faith in the goodness of human nature. It is quite surprising that they still attempted to promote the goodness of human nature and the possibility of restoring it while living in a time of great chaos in which wars broke out frequently as vassal states battled one another for control of the territory. During this period, the social and moral order was in upheaval, as subordinates dared to kill their rulers and sons killed their fathers. With faith in the goodness of human nature, Confucius and Mencius were determined to make education available to the masses, a right that only the noble class were entitled to in the former three dynasties. The famous phrase “youjiao wulei” (there should be no class distinction in education) was an expression of Confucius’ idealistic world view. Confucius and Mencius were optimistic about the future even though they were pessimistic about the present. They longed for a great utopian society with a legal system that emphasized teaching and moral guidance rather than punishment as instruments for the governance of people. In the Confucian philosophy, not only could the law reward the good and punish the evil, but it was also tasked with the mission of promoting the goodness of human nature. This is one of the most prominent characteristics of Confucianism and also of Chinese legal thought.

Another characteristic of Confucianism is that it tilted toward belief in a natural heaven rather than in a heaven as personified powers of nature. For Confucius and Mencius, Heaven could be either natural or personified. Unlike the Duke of Zhou, they emphasized the fulfillment of human life while largely ignoring discussion of Heaven and deified beings. Jilu, a disciple of Confucius, once asked him questions about ghosts and spirits, to which Confucius responded, “while you cannot serve men, how can you serve ghosts and spirits?” Jilu continued to ask: “Then what is death all about?” Confucius answered: “You haven’t even figured out what life is all about, why bother with death?” The answer reflected the fact that Confucius remained neutral regarding things that he did not know (Ames and Rosemont 2022: 213).

On the other hand, not being completely free from the influence of the theocracy, Confucius and Mencius suggested that people revere ghosts and spirits but meanwhile keep them at a distance. This is why Mozi criticized the Confucians for contradictory statements, because they denied the existence of Heaven and deified beings on the one hand but emphasized the importance of sacrificial rites to them on the other. Yet it was the logic reasoning of ghosts and spirits at a distance that kept the law in ancient China separate from the control of gods and deified beings. In essence, this was a tolerance of different religions. Meanwhile, this reasoning also turned ancient China into the most civilized society, unrivaled by any other ancient civilization. On this Youlan Feng commented: “In dealing with the dead, if we treat them as if they were entirely dead, that would show lack of affection and should not be done; or, if we treat them as if they were entirely alive, that would show lack of wisdom and should not be done” (Feng 2001: 319).

The pre-Qin Confucians were concerned more with humans and their life than with Heaven. They questioned whether the law under Heaven could punish the evil and reward the good, and whether it could protect the well-being of humans. It is this “people-oriented” ideology that embodies what we call legal idealism today.

Furthermore, the pre-Qin Confucians, resting on their belief in the goodness of human nature, did not debate on the forms of law. Unlike the Legalists, they did not study the content of law or the use of language in law; nor did they focus on how laws were made and implemented. They did not equate laws with punishments and did not require that punishments should be proportionate to the gravity of the crime. Instead, they studied the principles of law, the effects of law on society, and the moral values of law. In his publication On the History of the Development of Legal Theory in China, Liang Qichao concluded that the Confucians adhered to the school of “natural law,” as natural law constitutes one of the foundational concepts in Confucian philosophy (The Editorial Board of the Encyclopedia of China 1984: 180).^[2]

It is tempting to equate Confucian thought with the Western concept of natural law, as the moral ethics (of the legal system) promoted by the Confucians roughly align with the philosophy of natural law theorists:

They tend to maintain that law-making is a purposive activity that must satisfy certain moral requirements in order for it to have laws as its outcome. Secondly, they tend to maintain that the question of the existence of laws cannot be completely separated from the question of their moral obligatoriness or moral quality. Thus, natural law theorists adopt, or come close to adopting, a moral-deontic position. (Golding 1974: 101)

Nevertheless, it is inaccurate to equate Confucianism with the natural law school, for Confucianism is part of Chinese culture, with distinctive characteristics that differentiate it from Western schools of jurisprudence. Though it may share similar views with some Western legal theories, it has its roots in Chinese culture and aims at solving problems unique to this culture. The pre-Qin Confucians formed their thinking on topics such as ritual propriety, moral principles, and admirable qualities of men (particularly of kings) by studying the former three dynasties (especially the Western Zhou dynasty). They believed there was a regular pattern in the history of the three dynasties: all their rites and laws emphasized the importance of loyalty toward the ruler, filial piety toward parents, women’s chastity, and moral obligations. All of these virtues express the spirit of the Chinese civilization. In other words, the most important thing for a nation was to cultivate a great culture, and making sure that this culture could be passed down for generations was fundamental to the prosperity of the nation. This can be seen as cultural pride. In terms of law, the Confucians valued the spirit of it more than the institution of law itself, as the former reflected the spirit of the people within a culture. This is why today many scholars also consider Confucianism as the historical school of jurisprudence.

The spirit of law was much valued by the pre-Qin Confucians, who emphasized that law must give in to moral principles, but this does not mean that they denied the necessity of law and the effects that law had on society. It is just that they believed that an institution – be it the institution of law or the institution of ritual and music – would lose its purpose and significance without an inner spirit. Confucius once asked, if humans were evil by nature, what would be the use of ritual and music?^[3] In his view, people observed laws and showed reverence toward the institution of ritual and music because from within their hearts they wanted to do so, not because they were forced to do so by the authorities. Also, the pre-Qin Confucians emphasized that law should not violate moral principles. Compared to the Legalists, the Confucians set out more detailed and complicated requirements for people to observe laws from within their hearts, supporting that laws should be made from the bottom up. They opposed government interventions of forcefully changing local customs, and one of the fundamental principles of law-making they promoted was “when in Rome, do as the Romans do” (Ma 2015: 59). Their reasoning as such exerted everlasting influence on the institution of law of imperial times, which is perhaps why there was no nationwide civil code ever enacted in imperial China. Therefore, we need to be critical when it comes to the question of whether the absence of a written civil code is a natural outcome or a result of the ruling class being incompetent to produce it. For a large agricultural nation, it might have been a wiser decision to employ ritual propriety and local customs to maintain harmonious order and resolve disputes within a community. The Confucians might have considered it unwise to govern the society and people’s life by means of a detailed code of law.

Confucianism shares similar views with some Western schools of jurisprudence, including the natural school of law, the historical school of law, and the sociological school of law. Yet we cannot simply equate Confucianism with any of these schools, just as we cannot regard the ritual propriety promoted by the Confucians as the same thing as customary law, constitutional law, or civil law, even though some parts of ritual propriety are similar to the principles of these three fields of law. Confucianism is Confucianism and ritual propriety is ritual propriety: they are not something else. In addition, some “generally accepted opinions” also need to be reconsidered here, i.e. that “laws” in Confucian philosophy actually refer to “punishments.” This misunderstanding has been extended to make the claim that the laws of imperial China were all penal by nature. This is not true.

Yan Fu, who was one of the leaders of China’s Hundred Days of Reform (1898) and was acclaimed by Liang Qichao as the first of the Qing dynasty to introduce Western culture to China (Ma 2015: 60), pointed out in his translation of Montesquieu’s work, The Spirit of the Laws:

The Western concept of law actually includes the ritual propriety we have in China. China has both ritual propriety and penal laws, with the former being employed to teach people how to behave politely following the ethical norms while the latter to punish those who commit crimes. The West tends to make compilations of different fields of laws for their citizens to follow. They call these compilations “codes,” and the penal code is part of them. China’s Rites of Zhou, Tang Tongdian encyclopedia, Great Qing legal code, and Qing Tongdian encyclopedia are actually encompassed in Western concepts of law and code. It is thus inaccurate to simply equate laws in imperial China with only the imperial decrees or precedents issued by the Ministry of Justice (xingbu). The nationwide laws passed by the Parliament in the West are equivalent to the imperial decrees (which were compiled on a regular basis starting from the Qin dynasty) issued by emperors in China. This is called law-making by central government (Yan 1909: 4; see also Yan 2014; our translation^[4])

Zhang Guohua stated this more simply: “the ‘rites’ of Zhou are the ‘laws’ established by the Zhou rulers to regulate the relationship between members of the aristocracy and between the commoners” (Zhang 1991: 13). Another “generally accepted opinion” is that the Confucians despised the law and lacked awareness of “playing by the rules.” This is doubly wrong. The Confucians emphasized the spirit of the law and questioned whether a law was benevolent and whether it violated moral principles. This questioning is the supporting structure of Confucian legal idealism.

2 Confucius’s thinking on law

Living in a period of ritual and music, Confucius was disheartened by the fact that traditional values were diminishing and that the “rule of law” proposed by the Legalists was gaining increasing support.

It was through his study of history that Confucius distilled his unique idea of law, which can be understood from the following four aspects. First, it is important to understand that the traditional rule of ritual propriety of the Western Zhou dynasty was a combination of both ideology and institutional rules. The institution of ritual and music embodied not just the spirit of law but also the principles in applying punishments (which were just one component of ritual and music). Punishments (note here that Confucius said “punishments” instead of “the law”) were only instrumental in the traditional rule of ritual propriety, without which they would not fit the crimes, just as Confucius stated in the Analects: “if ritual and music cannot be developed, then criminal punishments will not be appropriate” (Ames and Rosemont 2022: 246).

The second aspect is the significance of filial piety (xiao), which is believed to be inherent in humans. Filial piety, as the cornerstone of both one’s life and the institution of ritual and music, played a key role in applying punishments. When filial piety contradicted a law, such as in cases where a filial son commits murder to take revenge on those who have killed his father, or where a righteous man breaks the law for defending justice, law enforcement officers should hold to the spirit of law, granting pardon to these filial law breakers. In the view of Confucius, morality is more important than law. Confucius states: “the father conceals the wrongs of his son, and the son conceals the wrongs of his father. This is the moral and righteous way” (see Analects: Zi Lu, 13).^[5]

Third, the ultimate purpose of law was to help build a society where there was no civil litigation being brought. It was incumbent on clans and community members to live in harmony and take pride in being courteous while feeling humiliated if hostile to others. Such was the ideal way advocated by the Confucians to rule a state.

Finally, the ruler was expected to set a good example for his people to follow, which was far more crucial than the mandatory application of his law. Confucius held that the ideal way for a sage king to rule his state was for his people to follow the ruler’s good example, and as Confucius famously taught, achieving personal clarity and balance is the foundation for effective leadership. When one’s own life is in order, guidance flows naturally, and success follows effortlessly. Conversely, attempting to lead without first attending to one’s own affairs results in futile effort, regardless of the instructions given.

The philosophy of Confucius, despite being criticized by the Legalists as pedantic and impractical, served as the orthodox school of thought for centuries, beginning with the reign of Emperor Wu of Han (156–87 BCE), and whoever challenged Confucian philosophy was considered to be deviant and heretic. A much-quoted proverb states that in imperial China a ruler could “rule the state well following half of the teachings from the Analects” – this is because a disproportionate part of the book involved discussions on rules and laws. Regarded as golden rules that were passed down from generation to generation, these discussions also served as legislative and judicial principles, dominating imperial China for thousands of years.

3 The core of law – “follow the Way of Heaven and govern in accordance with the feelings of men”

The Analects documented that the Duke of Ye once instructed Confucius, saying that there was an upright man in his hometown. His father had stolen a sheep, and the upright man testified against him. Confucius disagreed with his remarks, saying “the upright men in my hometown are different. Fathers cover up for their sons and sons cover up for their fathers. Uprightness lies therein.”^[7] Confucius was proud that his disciple Zilu could gain trust among his community because of his frankness and honesty, praising that when asked to adjudicate a lawsuit Zilu would only need to hear a single statement from either side (of the plaintiff or the defendant), because no one would want to lie to him. Confucius said: “Able to adjudicate a lawsuit by hearing a single statement – would this not characterize Zilu?”^[8] This also reflected how Confucius saw the law: the law itself had nothing to do with uprightness or justice. A person who adhered to the letter of the law was not necessarily an upright person, but he who acted by considering the feelings of men was regarded as upright, for justice was reflected in the feelings of men. This explains why Confucius favored the fathers who covered up for their sons, the sons who covered up for their fathers, and his disciple Zilu, who was able to adjudicate a lawsuit by hearing just a single statement. Confucius believed that only the law that embodied the feelings of men was upright and just, and whether a ruling was just and convincing depended primarily on the moral character of the judge and his interpretation of the law, not upon the law.

The “feelings of men” in Confucian philosophy refers to what was promoted by the teachings of ritual propriety, and this was: “the duties and love toward blood relatives, the paying of respect to those in authority and to elders, and the maintenance of the differences between men and women.”^[9] Humans were born with the foundations upon which conditions of peace and order were maintained. A fulfilling and meaningful life was one in which individuals were properly aware of the position they held within a social order, and in which each individual readily fulfilled their responsibilities as a father, a son, a king, a minister, an elder, a youngster, a husband, or a wife. The Confucians did not encourage an individual to report the crimes committed by his father or blood relatives, as this was against both the principles of being a good man and against the feelings of men. The law that promoted a person telling on his father was against the feelings of men, and therefore would not work as well, as the law that encouraged fathers to cover up for their sons and sons to cover up for their fathers. If a father broke the law, his children had to do whatever necessary to conceal it as a way of showing filial piety to their parents. Likewise, if a child committed a crime, their parents had to help cover it up as a way of showing love and affection to their child. This was the way to safeguard the feelings of men,^[10] which in the view of Confucius represented the greatest justice under Heaven. Confucius was deeply convinced that the feelings of men were the benchmark for the determination of whether a law was good or not. When the feelings of men were at odds with the law, Confucius chose to stand on the side of the former. When his disciple Gongye Chang was imprisoned, he defended him against his critics saying that though he was now in shackles, it was through no crime of his own. Confucius even wed his daughter to Gongye Chang while he was still in prison, just to demonstrate his faith in his future son-in-law.

The contemporary pursuit of honesty and justice within the legal system is exemplified by Zilu’s method of adjudicating lawsuits, wherein he would attentively consider just a single testimony from either the plaintiff or the defendant. The law, only when accepted willingly by the general public, can have real authority and be said to have achieved its intended purpose. This is why when the law was at odds with the feelings of men, the Confucians insisted on the abandonment of the letter of the law while prioritizing the feelings of men, because the latter were the eternal law of society.

4 Prominent Confucian philosophers

Confucianism was founded by Confucius in the Spring and Autumn period, and two of the most famous Confucian philosophers of the Warring States period are Mencius and Xunzi. The pre-Qin Confucians were worried about the reforms of their time, resisting the idea of law reforms and the concept of “the rule of law” proposed by the Legalists (which will be discussed in detail in the next section). The dominant lens through which Confucius and Mencius viewed “the rule of law” was one of fierce opposition to harsh administrative policies. Both Confucius (“the Sage of Confucianism”) and Mencius (“the Second Sage of Confucianism”) held that ruthless laws would lead to a situation in which the ruler became non-benevolent and the people “unrighteous.” They believed the methods of state governance in the past, characterized by rule of ritual propriety (lizhi), rule of virtue (dezhi), and rule of men (renzhi), were more effective than “the rule of law” advocated by the Legalists.

Pre-Qin Confucian thought was centered on the concept of “ren” (often translated as “benevolence” or “humaneness”), and the Confucians believed that harsh laws and punishments that went against moral principles would have negative effects on society. After Confucius died, Confucianism was divided into eight sub-schools led by eight of his most influential followers, two of whom were Mencius and Xunzi.

Confucius lived during the late Spring and Autumn period, a time marked by significant reforms in vassal states. Each state implemented its own unique strategies, while some reforms proved to be more successful than others. The State of Lu,^[15] for example, preserved most of the traditions and ideas of the Western Zhou dynasty, including the idea of rule of ritual propriety, as documented in the historical book Commentary of Zuo (zuozhuan),^[16] which states that the “rule of ritual propriety is completely preserved in the State of Lu.”^[17] In his early years, Confucius performed rituals, a task that offered him many opportunities to learn about the rites of Zhou, which he was much interested in; meanwhile he also studied the Zhou government codes, regulations, and institutions (dianzhang zhidu). He admired the Duke of Zhou, who invented the institution of ritual and music. Confucius believed a refined version of the Duke of Zhou’s system of thought would make all states under Heaven a better place.

The Confucian philosophy was based on the concept of “benevolence,” underpinned by the belief that humans were good by nature. The Confucian concept of benevolence had a myriad of meanings, with the most fundamental one being “love for others” or “universal love for others,” which was also one of the basic principles in dealing with human relationships. To follow this principle, at home a father should be kind to his children, a son should be filial to his parents, an elder brother should befriend his little brothers, while a little brother should show respect to his elder brothers. In the ruler–subordinate relationship, he insisted that the ruler should treat his ministers with ritual propriety, while in return the ministers should serve their ruler with loyalty. In dealing with strangers, a benevolent man was expected to establish himself and witness the establishment of others, while simultaneously desiring his own success and seeing that others achieve theirs.^[18] At the same time, he should not do to others what he did not want done to himself. In short, the principle required people to show filial piety to their parents, love to their siblings, loyalty to their ruler, and kindness to others. All that was emphasized in the rites of Zhou – loyalty toward the ruler, filial piety, female chastity, and moral obligations – was preserved in the Confucian philosophy as demonstrations of being benevolent. The political ideals of Confucius were to achieve governance by moral principles that emphasized the importance of being benevolent; governance that advocated extending the kind of love characteristic of that among family members to others was a good fit for the agricultural society of imperial China. In Confucian philosophy, the law – constituting an integral part of governance by moral principles – assumed dual roles: it could be both mother and father at every turn, a loving parent as well as a disciplinarian. On the one hand, both rulers and parents should try their best to instruct their subordinates and children in moral teachings, training them to be self-disciplined so that they have fewer disputes with others. And when disputes did occur, they should be resolved in a way acceptable to both parties. The attitude that the Confucians took toward dealing with civil “lawsuits” is what we call paternalism today. On the other hand, the Confucians supported the infliction of harsh punishments for some horrific “crimes.” Confucius considered the infliction of harsh punishments as a last resort, saying that the purpose of harsh punishments, serving as a deterrence to criminals, was to help them form a sense of shame, just as when a strict father punished his children, he was to let them know that they had done something wrong and that they must have a sense of shame.

Mencius (full name Meng Ke and literary name Ziyu) is believed to have lived from 372 BCE to 289 BCE in the State of Zou (now Zou County, Shandong Province). He was a descendant of the Meng (or Meng-sun) clan, one of the three ruling families in the State of Lu, and it is said that he was educated by a student of Confucius’s grandson Zisi. Before he turned forty, Mencius had spent most of his time teaching, delighted that “he had attracted the flower of the young men and nurtured them with instruction.” After forty, he traveled to different states in an attempt to convince the rulers to “govern through benevolence” (renzheng). His later years were devoted largely to the writing of books in which he elaborated his philosophical ideas. One of the greatest works produced by Mencius and his students is the Mencius, which, according to the chapter titled “Biographies of Mencius and Xunzi” in Shiji (Historical records), consists of seven “books,” respectively “King Hui of Liang,” “Gongsun Chou,” “Duke Wen of Teng,” “Li Lou,” “Wan Zhang,” “Gaozi,” and “Exhausting the mind.” Another source, “The record of arts and literature,” however, states that the Mencius has eleven “books” in total, with four supplementary ones. It is commonly accepted that the seven books as documented in Historical records are by Mencius, while the supplementary four are not his writings.

Mencius admired Confucius, once saying of him, “all these stand out from their kind, far above the crowd. Since the birth of humankind, there has been no one as outstanding as Confucius.”^[19] The only true successor of Confucius, in the view of Mencius, was Zisi. Mencius saw himself as the transmitter of Confucian philosophy; his teachings of Confucian thought, combined with the philosophy of Zisi, were developed into a sub-school of Confucianism called the “School of Zisi and Mencius.” For his contributions to the inheritance and development of the Confucian tradition, Mencius was and still is acclaimed as the “Second Sage” of Confucianism. In the late Han dynasty and afterwards, not only did the philosophies of Confucius and Mencius become the orthodox thought of both Confucianism and society as a whole, but they were favored by most rulers and became the official thought system of imperial China for centuries, acclaimed by scholars as “eternal classics.”

Mencius was born in the middle of the Warring States period, a time that differed remarkably from the Spring and Autumn period in which Confucius lived. Although the time Confucius lived was characterized by the destruction of ritual and music, the prevailing belief of society was still in the traditional rule of ritual propriety. No social reformer, no matter how outstanding he was, such as Guan Zhong or Zi Chan, dared to claim that they had abandoned the ancestral values that emphasized the importance of ritual propriety, righteousness, and sense of shame. Even if the regional rulers had become no less powerful than the king, they still dared not publicly defy the king but instead issued their mandates under the king’s name.

When it came to the Warring States period, however, things were completely different, as people were exhausted by the constant and seemingly never-ending wars, and the tyranny of the rulers prompted the collapse of traditional institutions along with the increasing questioning of ancestral values. Social reformers now dared to publicly dismiss traditional values, while regional rulers vied for power without fearing the king. The hegemonic idea of the Legalists “relying on force to make others submit” prevailed, whereas the kingly way proposed by the Confucians of “relying on virtue to make others submit” was deemed impractical. Reforms became the trend of the era: powerful states did so with ambitions to expand their territories and even to unify all states under Heaven, while small states did it in an attempt to keep themselves from being annexed.

Mencius knew the rule of Zhou would never return and that the philosophy of Confucius was difficult to disseminate. Despite his disappointment in the present, he had faith in the goodness of human nature, sticking to his ideals that Confucian philosophy was the only remedy to end the disorder under Heaven. Facing a different situation from Confucius, Mencius adhered to the thought of Confucius and improved it, making it more complete. The biggest contribution Mencius made to Confucian philosophy was that he proposed the concept of “governance through benevolence” (renzheng)^[20] by extending Confucius’s idea of “benevolence” to the field of politics. “Benevolence” in the thought system of Mencius was something that humans were born with, and, more importantly, it was one of the most fundamental governing principles that the rulers should follow. To govern through benevolence, a ruler should set an example by adhering to moral principles himself, making benevolence the bedrock of his rule. His policies, methods of governance, and establishment of institutions should also meet the requirements of benevolence. He should govern people with merciful methods, particularly with merciful teachings.

Three main ideas of governance through benevolence are as follows:

1. Humans are good by nature: The belief that “humans are good by nature” is fundamental to the concept of governance through benevolence. Mencius held that the “benevolence” advocated by Confucius originated from the innate goodness of humans.

2. The people are more important than the ruler: The belief that “the people are more important than the ruler,”^[21] which is core to the concept of governance through benevolence, is the most valuable part of Mencius’s philosophy. Mencius believed that Emperor Yao and Emperor Shun conquered all under Heaven because they gained people’s hearts, whereas King Jie and King Zhou lost all under Heaven because they lost people’s hearts. So it is incumbent on the ruler to win people’s hearts if his goal is to conquer all states under Heaven.

3. Promoting educational transformation is a priority: The legal thought that emphasized the importance of governance through benevolence incorporated elements of idealism. Mencius maintained hope for human nature, reckoning that the disorder under Heaven would be ended if humans maintained or restored the goodness inherent in them. And their maintenance or restoration of the goodness of human nature should not be something they were forced to do, but something they wanted to do from within their hearts, as they were well cultivated and educated. In Mencius’s view, the best way to achieve governance through benevolence was to promote educational transformation. He was a proponent of the unification of all under Heaven, yet he also said the unification should be done by the ruler through winning people’s hearts.

Xunzi is another prominent philosopher who followed Confucius and Mencius. The philosophy of Xunzi, with the system of thought of Confucius as its underlying structure, incorporated the ideas of other schools of thought, evolving into a well-known Confucian sub-school toward the end of the Warring States period. Other famous philosophers of the Legalist School, such as Han Fei and Li Si,^[22] were all students of Xunzi. The late Warring States period is generally regarded as the most fully developed period for most schools of thought. Xunzi was able to enrich Confucian philosophy by first summarizing the ideas of the hundred schools. Xunzi paid special attention to the “School of Zisi and Mencius,” and after intensive study, he wrote critiques on the thought of Zisi and Mencius. While analyzing and summarizing the ideas from a hundred schools, he gradually formed his own system of thought that was unique among all the Confucian sub-schools. Xunzi and Mencius were speaking at cross-purposes, as they assumed different concepts under several key terms. For example, Mencius advocated emulating the laws and institutions of the former sage rulers, while Xunzi emphasized the necessity of emulating the laws and institutions of the current rulers. Mencius believed that humans were good by nature, while Xunzi believed that humans were evil by nature. Mencius promoted the kingly way of governance while criticizing the hegemonic way of governance, whereas Xunzi supported the employment of both. Mencius emphasized the role of moral ethics in law, while Xunzi emphasized the roles of both moral ethics and punishments in law, stating that moral ethics and punishments were equally important. For all the complexity and comprehensiveness of Xunzi’s philosophy, its tenets are clear when studied following this line of thought: humans are evil by nature^[23] and this nature can and must be transformed through education. In addition, strict laws are necessary because educational transformation will not completely erase the basic evil inherent in human beings. Despite the fact that Xunzi held different opinions on human nature from Confucius and Mencius, the remedy he provided for ending the chaos under Heaven was similar to that given by Confucius and Mencius: all three promoted the teaching of virtue and ritual propriety and the kingly way of governance (or governance through benevolence). Xunzi based his philosophy on Confucian thought while incorporating the ideas of other schools of thought to modernize the philosophy.

5 Confucius’s thinking on law further developed by Mencius and Xunzi

Confucius established his legal thought based on his development of the political ideas of the Duke of Zhou, arguing that the necessary way to set things right was to improve the philosophy of the Duke of Zhou and facilitate the recapture of traditional values. This is why he endeavored to justify the rule of ritual propriety proposed by the Duke of Zhou as effective in state governance. After Confucius’s passing, his two followers Mencius and Xunzi further developed his thinking on law, but from different perspectives.

6 Conclusions

These distinctive features mentioned above have granted Confucian legal thought a significant position in Chinese traditional culture. They have profoundly influenced social morality, the educational systems, and behavioral norms, and Confucian legal thought from the pre-Qin period still has a significant influence on contemporary society in China:

1. Confucian legal thought emphasizes self-cultivation and moral responsibility, continuing to impact contemporary societal values. Concepts such as respect for others, concern for social welfare, and emphasis on family harmony are still highly regarded.

2. The educational philosophy of Confucian legal thought continues to play a role in modern education. The ideas of cultivating moral character, promoting holistic development of individuals, and fostering a sense of civic responsibility have influenced educational systems and methods.

3. Confucian legal thought emphasizes the importance of self-cultivation, family harmony, effective governance, and global peace, still providing guidance for social harmony and governance. Notions such as benevolence, respect for others, and concern for social welfare are crucial for social stability and development.

4. Confucian legal thought also has a certain influence on leadership and principles of governance. Concepts like the “way of the gentleman” and the practice of benevolent governance promote leading by example and governing with benevolence, shaping the moral requirements and governance approaches of leaders.

5. Confucian legal thought still holds significant importance in academic research and cultural heritage. Confucianism continues to be studied and passed down as an academic discipline, actively contributing to the preservation and development of cultural traditions.

In summary, Confucian legal philosophy from the pre-Qin period remains a potent force in contemporary society, profoundly shaping the values of the Chinese populace, educational doctrines, social cohesion, governance methodologies, and even academic inquiry and cultural legacy.