stered the Empire.

Confucius himself belongs rather to the type of Lycurgus and Solon than
to that of the great founders of religions. He was a practical
statesman, concerned with the administration of the State; the virtues
he sought to inculcate were not those of personal holiness, or designed
to secure salvation in a future life, but rather those which lead to a
peaceful and prosperous community here on earth. His outlook was
essentially conservative, and aimed at preserving the virtues of former
ages. He accepted the existing religion--a rather unemphatic
monotheism, combined with belief that the spirits of the dead preserved
a shadowy existence, which it was the duty of their descendants to
render as comfortable as possible. He did not, however, lay any stress
upon supernatural matters. In answer to a question, he gave the
following definition of wisdom: "To cultivate earnestly our duty towards
our neighbour, and to reverence spiritual beings while maintaining
always a due reserve."[16] But reverence for spiritual beings was not an
_active_ part of Confucianism, except in the form of ancestor-worship,
which was part of filial piety, and thus merged in duty towards one's
neighbour. Filial piety included obedience to the Emperor, except when
he was so wicked as to forfeit his divine right--for the Chinese, unlike
the Japanese, have always held that resistance to the Emperor was
justified if he governed very badly. The following passage from
Professor Giles[17] illustrates this point:--

The Emperor has been uniformly regarded as the son of God by
adoption only, and liable to be displaced from that position as a
punishment for the offence of misrule.... If the ruler failed in
his duties, the obligation of the people was at an end, and his
divine right disappeared simultaneously. Of this we have an
example in a portion of the Canon to be examined by and by. Under
the year 558 B.C. we find the following narrative. One of the
feudal princes asked an official, saying, "Have not the people of
the Wei State done very wrong in expelling their ruler?" "Perhaps
the ruler himself," was the reply, "may have done very wrong....
If the life of the people is impoverished, and if the spirits
are deprived of their sacrifices, of what use is the ruler, and
what can the people do but get rid of him?"

This very sensible doctrine has been accepted at all times throughou