and nlultivalent.

(This is not to claim tliat: Confucianism has never been

abused by men in power to gain obedience for purely selfish purposes.)
We now consider a second difference, che value ascribed to autonomy.
From the Western perspective, the Confucian person seems to be put in one
of two positions: either fulfilling a role or obeying; obedience seems to be
given preerxlinem value. Of course, &is isn't how it always works out-and
not simply because individuals of any culture sometimes place their own de-
sires ahead of the common good. Confucianists, as it happens, have been
very good at recognizing conflices bemeerr obedience to auehoriv and h l -
511ing other principles; they have also been good at acknowledging the fre-
quent conflicts between obedience to conflicting authorities and at recogniz-
ing that such conflicts may reyuirc of the individual agonizing decisions and
autosiomous acts.
Let me give two illustrations. One of the side panels on the Chinese sar-
cophagus at the Nelson/Atkins Gallery in Kansas City illustsarss a Coadu-
cianist parable that shows how the classic Confucian virtue of filial piety
might under certain circumstances require not obedience but the admonish-
mcnt ul 3 lather (though the restrictions on dis&cdfence demand &at cbe
admonishment be by example rather than verbal):'" you* man is sum-
moned by his father to help him carry the grandfather up a mountain to die.
The young man is reluceant to do this, but ought to obey his father. As they
leave the mountaintop, the young man picks up the litter before starting
down, and his father tells him not to bother with it, The son, howevex; insists
&at it will come in h m d y b r the next trip up the mouneain; the father real-
izes the next trip will be for him and, now able to put himself in the grandfa-
ther's place, brings the grandfather back down the mountain.35
Such stories, which are common, make it clear that unquestioned obedi-
ence is not a Confucian virtue. The young man is singled out as an example
of filial piety, yet he has challenged his father's commands. It would be su-
perficial to see this as simply a dilemma of conflicting duties to two different
authorities, the father and the grandfather. But it is true tliat one way in
which the Confucian self develops is through resolving the dilemmas of con-
flicting dulfes-and Confucian arcs arc ful! of stories illustrafing such con-
flicts. N o r is this simply a conflict between duty to obey and a "higher" duty
to abstract principles, another theme often encountered in Confucian litera-
ture, Rather, the young man here is choosing a visiorr of Life and an inlcrpre-
tation of the significance of the relationship between father and son that al-
lows for the fullest possibility of human growth.36
In a more civic and verbally explicit vein, wc have the chastising lelfer
written to the Japanese Shogun Minamoto Yoriie in 1200 C.E. by Mongaku,
a close adviser to Yoriie's father. Though a Shingon monk, and evincing
Buddhist principles as adviser (and subject), Mongaku had a Confucianist's
responsibility to obey the ruler. But he atso clearly thought lie had a re-
syonsibitity to point out the leader's moral obligariuns as rUter.37 h general,