Liuzi 劉子

Liuzi 劉子 is a philosophical treatise compiled by an unknown author during the Liang period 梁 (502-557). It is also called Liuzi xinlun 劉子新論 "A new discussion of Master Liu", Liuzi 流子 "Streaming Master" or Deyan 德言 "Words about virtue".

There is a considerable discussion about who "Master Liu" was. Some think it was Liu Xie 劉勰 (c. 470—c. 522/538年), author of the literary critique Wenxin diaolong 文心雕龍, others think it was Liu Zhou 劉晝 (516-567) from the Northern Qi period 北齊 (550-577) or even Liu Xin 劉歆 (d. 23 CE) from the Han period 漢 (206 BCE-220 CE). The transmitted shape of the book was created by Liu Xiaobiao 劉孝標 (462-521) of the Liang period and Yuan Xiaozheng 袁孝政 of the Tang period 唐 (618-907). The estimated dates of the compilation thus range from the Han to the Tang period. The modern scholar Yu Jiaxi 余嘉鍚 (1883–1955) follows statements in the book catalogues Zhizhai shulu jieti 直齋書錄解題, and Junzhai dushu zhi 郡齋讀書志 which hold that the book was a compilation of Liu Zhou, so that the date of compilation must have been in the mid-6th century.

Liu Zhou, courtesy name Kongzhao 孔昭, hailed from Bohai 渤海 (modern Fucheng 阜城, Hebei). He was a Confucian scholar under the Northern Qi dynasty 北齊 (550-577), but was never appointed to a state office. He has compiled the books Liuzi, Didao 帝道 "The way of the ruler" and Jinxiang biyan 金箱璧言 "The golden box of jade words". The Liuzi seems to have been compiled for the rulers of the Northern Qi dynasty to provide them with examples from history and philosophical writings to demonstrate how good government would work. Liu Zhou was very disappointed that the ruling family Gao 高 was never considered reading the memorials he submitted to the throne or to consult his political-philosophical writings.

The content of the 10-juan-long book Liuzi is vibrant. It deals with philosophy, politics, economy, military and cultural matters. It covers all aspects of governing a state and cultivating the self; it explains the influence of Yin and Yang, the Daoist Way and its Virtue, Confucianism, Mohism, legalism, the propositions of dialecticians, and the machinations of the coalition advisors; it touches aspects of agriculture and nature, things of everyday life and virtually everything that can be heard and seen.

In the philosophical sphere, the author gives proof of the adaption of Daoist concepts in Confucian thinking during the Southern Dynasties period 南朝 (420~589). This integration led to a new interpretation of the Confucian Classics.

Various scholars have classified the Liuzi as either a Daoist or Confucian text. However, the mixed nature of its philosophical content has led to its classification as a product of "eclecticist thinkers" (zajia 雜家). The first four chapters can be attributed to the school of Huang-Lao thought (Huang-Lao xuepai 黃老學派), which was prominent during the Han period. This school emphasised the importance of self-cultivation, achievable only through purifying one's heart and freeing oneself from worldly categories of right and wrong. Conversely, a wise man must dedicate himself to the welfare and security of the state. Liu Zhou highlights the significance of learning in developing an exemplary individual character. Both spirit and heart must be purified. Only then will rulers and ministers, as well as upper and lower classes, trust each other and fully understand the state's and society's position in the universe. Reliability and self-confidence as manifestations of the Confucian virtues of loyalty, filial piety, kindness, and righteousness rely on the pursuit of knowledge. A ruler endowed with these virtues would be like the wind moving the grass (the people) and a vessel giving form to the water (society). Any ruler must depend on competent advisors and should promote individuals of great ability. Yet, in Liu Zhou’s view, this alone is insufficient for an ideal government. The legalist concept of an objective law governing the bureaucracy inspired Liu Zhou to emphasise the necessity of adapting laws and regulations to contemporary circumstances. A blind perpetuation of antiquity would not benefit a modern state.