"O Soul, Come Back!" A Study in The Changing Conceptions of The ...

SOUL AND AFTERLIFE 377and the p 'o governs his body (including the senses.) It is interestingto point out that a similar distinction between the hun and the p'ocan also be found in Han Taoist literature. According to the HoshangCommentary on the Lao Tzu, heaven feeds man with five kinds ofch'i, which enter his body from the nostrils and are stored in hisheart (or mind). The five kinds of ch'i are pure and subtle andtherefore go to form man's spirit, senses, voice etc. Thus a man hasa soul called hun. The hun is masculine; it goes out and comes inthrough the nostrils and communicates with heaven. Earth feedsman with five tastes which enter his body from the mouth and arestored in the stomach. The five tastes are impure and therefore go toform a man's body, bones and flesh, blood and veins, as well as sixemotions. Thus a man has a soul called p 'o. The p 'o is feminine; itgoes out and comes in through the mouth and communicates withearth.3' Although there are differences between the Confucian andthe Taoist versions with regard to the respective functions of the hunearthly ch'i while his mind or heart is the seat of the refined, heavenly ch'i (see D. C. Lau's"Introduction" in Mencius, p. 24). Although Mencius did not mention the ideas of hun andp'o in his philosophical discussions, it is nevertheless unmistakable that his distinction betweenthe ta-t 'i and the hsiao-t 'i bears a resemblance to the distinction between the hun and p 'oas defined by Cheng Hsuian, not only structurally but also functionally. In view of the gradualfusion of the ideas of hun and p'o since the sixth cetury B.C., I find it difficult to resist the temptationto link this Mencian formulation to a contemporary dualistic conception of the soul as apossible model. If so, then Cheng Hsiuan's interpretation of the different functions of the hunand the p'o may well have been of a much earlier (i.e. pre-Han) origin. Traditionally, it hasbeen contended, especially by the Ch'ing philologists, that the commentaries written by HanConfucian exegetes may, by and large, be viewed as depositories of ideas of classical antiquitytransmitted orally from generation to generation down to Han times. It seems likely thatCheng Hsuian's ideas about hun and p'O have precisely such ancient origins.3' Lao Tzu tao-te ching TAftg. (SPTK edition), A.3b. Here the hun-ch'i is clearly describedas a breath-like life force. In this respect, the Chinese idea of hun is certainly comparableto its counterparts in other ancient cultures. The Greek psyche and thymos, the Romananimus and anima, and the Jewish nephesh, for instance, were all associated with breath. SeeRichard Broxton Onians, The Origins of European Thought About the Body, the Mind, the Soul, theWorld, Time, and Fate, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1954), esp. pp. 44-46 and66-69 (for thymos); 93-95 (for psyche); 168-73 (for anima and animus); 481-82 (for nephesh).Onians is basically right in pointing out the similarity between the Chinese idea of hun-ch'iand the Greek and Roman ideas of soul, even though his discussions of "Chinese conceptionof the soul" (pp. 520-30) are full of factual errors as well as anachronisms. For psyche assomething airy and breath-like, see the classic study of Erwin Rohde, Psyche, tr. by W. B.Hillis, (New York: 1925), pp. 4-5; also Emily Vermeule, Aspects of Death in Early Greek Art andPoetry, (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1979), pp. 212-13 (note 11 to chapter one);and Bruno Snell, The Discovery of the Mind, The Greek Origins of European Thought, tr. by T. G.Rosenmeyer (Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 1953), pp. 8-12 (for a discussionof psyche and thymos).