Affective Governance Through Ritual Praxis: A Comparative Study of Confucian Sacrificial Systems and Western Social Cohesion Theories

Abstract

Sacrificial rituals provide a critical perspective for examining the fundamental characteristics and evolutionary trajectory of Chinese civilization. The Functionalist and Annales schools, through theoretical frameworks such as “natural necessity theory” and “social-centric theory”, have explored the origins of sacrificial practices and their role in social cohesion. When these schools investigate Chinese sacrificial rituals, they identify significant differences in the humanistic and ethical dimensions compared to in Western intellectual traditions, thereby revealing how these distinctions propelled China onto a unique civilizational path. The sacrificial system underwent a process of humanization and moralization during the Shang and Zhou dynasties, culminating in the recognition of benevolence–righteousness attributes within human nature, primarily characterized by affection and reverence. The interplay between intrinsic human dispositions and ritualized sacrificial practices established the foundational structure for the social order, spanning from familial units to political society in China. This synthesis ultimately shaped the distinctive philosophical characteristics of Chinese civilization, emphasizing the principles of benevolent love, reciprocal loyalty, and harmonious coexistence.

1. Introduction

Chinese civilization exhibits a distinctive attitude towards others, deities, and the cosmos, embodying a unique approach to interpersonal relationships. Unlike the individualism prevalent in modern societies, Chinese culture places particular emphasis on the concept of ancestral continuity, manifesting through sacrificial rites (jisi 祭祀). Within this framework, the individual is regarded as a crucial link connecting ancestors and descendants, imbuing human relationships with a permanence transcending life and death (Hsu [1948] 2023)1. Fei (2021) observed that “living in a world inhabited by spirits and deities can also be a form of happiness” (p. 128). At the cosmological level, Chinese civilization neither perceives nature as an object for exploitation nor pursues its conquest. Instead, it embraces the principles of the unity of Heaven and Humanity (tianren heyi 天人合一)2 and harmonious coexistence (p. 146). In our conflict-ridden modern world, the emphasis that Chinese civilization places on harmony and solidarity holds significant value. To understand the origins and essence of these core characteristics, it is essential to trace their foundations and developmental trajectory, particularly the religious traditions that endowed this civilization with its unique character.

Religion, as the bedrock of indigenous civilizations, profoundly shapes the social order and systems of knowledge. Max Weber (1951, p. 477) argued that “world-images”, constructed by “ideas”, function like “switchmen” on a railway, determining the tracks along which action is pushed by the dynamic of interest. Consequently, he dedicated his work to exploring how the religions of different civilizations shaped their secular realities. In contrast, the Annales school, represented by Émile Durkheim (1915) and driven by concerns over modern crises like social disintegration, sought through comparative religious studies to identify the sacred bonds that sustain human solidarity. These theoretical perspectives highlight the pivotal position of Chinese civilization within East–West academic discourse.

Sacrifice (jisi 祭祀) constitutes a critical analytical entry point. The diverse array of sacrificial rituals fundamentally reflects how a community negotiates its relationship with ancestors, deities, and cosmic forces, revealing underlying value orientations and interpersonal attitudes. Deeply influenced by Confucian thought, China’s sacrificial tradition expresses sincere gratitude, remembrance, and reverence towards the recipients of the sacrifices. In traditional society, sacrificial rites held supreme importance. As recorded in classical texts such as The Book of Rites, Jitong states “Governance of the people prioritizes ritual (li 礼). Among the five canonical rites, none surpasses sacrifice (ji 祭). Sacrifice does not originate from external things; it arises from within the heart”. The Zuo Commentary declares the following: “The great affairs of the state lie in sacrifice (si 祀) and warfare (rong 戎)”. The Discourses of the States—Discourses of Chu notes “Sacrifice (si 祀) serves to manifest filial piety, give rest to the people, pacify the state, and settle the populace”.

These passages clearly indicate that sacrificial rituals constituted a vital mechanism of governance for cultivating social virtues and maintaining political order. The fundamental attitudes towards life and value judgments initially formed within a religious framework, particularly through institutionalized practices like sacrifice, profoundly shaped the patterns of interpersonal interaction, life institutions, and organizational structures within the civilization.

Western scholarship on Chinese religion and sacrificial practice often stems from concerns about modern predicaments, such as social alienation, seeking to uncover its profound humanistic value and sacred potential for social cohesion (Bellah 1967; Mauss and Hubert [1902] 2001; Geertz 1973; Stark 1999). Their in-depth exploration and high appreciation of the unique connotations of Chinese sacrificial tradition provide invaluable insights into the deep-rooted structures of Chinese civilization. According to the classical categorization in the Rites of Zhou—Spring Offices, the Zhou dynasty’s sacrificial system encompassed Heavenly Deities (tianshen 天神), Earthly Spirits (diqi 地气), and Human Ghosts (rengui 人鬼), with gratitude (gan’en 感恩) and reverence (jingwei 敬畏) as its core emotional elements. This human sentiment towards cosmic forces is fundamentally akin to filial affection and reverence towards parents and ancestors, representing a natural extension of familial love and respect (H. Lin 2024). Ancestor worship forms the cornerstone of the Chinese sacrificial system. This article employs a comparative Sino–Western perspective, using ancestral sacrifice as its analytical thread, to examine the origins and evolution of Chinese ritual institutions and to explore the foundational elements of Chinese socio-political order.

2. Literature Review

Ritual sacrifice, as a core practice of human civilization, has undergone a profound transformation in its scholarly interpretation—from functional analysis to a fundamental reflection on its essence. In early anthropological studies, the Functionalist and Annales schools established the foundational framework for ritual analysis, yet found themselves in an interpretative impasse due to their presupposition of Western centrism. This theoretical bottleneck spurred the late 20th-century wave of deconstructing civilizational essentialism, subsequently propelling theories of Multiple Modernities and Cultural Memory to reconstruct the dynamic nature of civilization. Against this backdrop, contemporary Chinese scholars, through in-depth excavation of the ethical transformation during the Shang–Zhou transition, have revealed a unique pathway for constructing a mind–nature-based (xinxing lun, 心性论) order, offering a new interpretation of the foundations of Chinese civilization. This chapter will conduct a systematic investigation tracing this trajectory of intellectual history.

Although the Functionalist and Annales schools pioneered a scientific approach to the study of sacrifice, their theoretical limitations became increasingly apparent in cross-civilizational comparisons. Malinowski, proceeding from individual psychological needs, interpreted the funeral rites of the Trobriand Islanders as a “psychological compensation mechanism” for coping with death anxiety, emphasizing the role of collective performance in maintaining community sentiment. This naturalistic perspective was developed by Radcliffe-Brown into the more structurally significant concept of “ritual efficacy.” While analyzing Chinese funeral rites, he praised Confucianism for stripping away “illusory beliefs” from sacrifice, yet he reduced the relationship between “ritual-propriety (li 理) and emotion (qing 情)” to one of external norms suppressing innate tendencies within the framework of Xunzi’s theory3 of innate human badness. This interpretation exposes three dilemmas:

• Reducing sacrificial motivation to biological fear fails to address the requirement for subjective virtue (de 德) emphasized in The Book of Rites: Meaning of Sacrifices (“致其诚信与其忠敬”, zhi qi chengxin yu qi zhongjing—cultivating sincerity and reverence);
• It overlooks the revolutionary ethical reconstruction of sacrifice during the Zhou dynasty through the concept of “matching Heaven with virtue” (yi de pei tian 以德配天), thereby reducing the dynamic civilizational process to a static framework;
• The naturalistic framework struggles to accommodate the ethical primacy of “repaying the source and returning to the origin” (bao ben fan shi 报本反始) in China, let alone interpret the generative logic of the mind–nature (xinxing 心性) oriented towards benevolence (ren 仁) and reverence (jing 敬).

Simultaneously, the Annales school’s sociocentrism faced similar challenges. Durkheim’s theory of “collective effervescence” profoundly revealed how sacrifice forges collective consciousness through shared feasting and offering rituals. However, its presupposition of the social origin of the sacred encountered challenges from Chinese experience. Granet was the first to apply this paradigm to Chinese studies, proposing a three-stage evolutionary model—primordial emotional outbursts at festivals, cosmological integration during the feudal era, and Confucian moralization in the imperial period—aptly capturing the ethical turn in Zhou dynasty sacrifice (Granet 1922). Yet, he simplified this transformation as an instrumental manipulation by the scholar-official class. His blind spots include overemphasizing the social as the sole source of the sacred, thereby obscuring the transcendent ethical foundation expressed in “What Heaven imparts is called nature” (tianming zhi wei xing 天命之谓性); neglecting how Confucianism transformed sacrifice into a moral practice through the conscious self-cultivation of the mind–nature, exemplified by Confucius’s proposition of sincerity and reverence in “If I do not participate in the sacrifice, it is as if I did not sacrifice at all” (wu bu yu ji, ru bu ji 吾不与祭，如不祭); and failing to grasp the distinctive trait of Chinese civilization—vertical integration through the bond of “filial piety-reverence” (xiao-jing 孝-敬). This “vertical collective consciousness”, summarized by Fei Xiaotong, positions the individual as an ethical intermediary linking ancestors and descendants.

While these schools contributed the socio-psychological foundations for ritual analysis, their reductionist tendencies led them into interpretative impasses: Functionalism compressed sacrifice into an expression of biological instinct, while Sociocentrism reduced it to a tool for power integration. Both failed to grasp the tripartite interaction of “Heaven’s Way (Tiandao 天道)—Mind-Nature (Xinxing 心性)—Ritual Law (Lifa 礼法)” within the Chinese ethical transformation.

The critical theories that emerged in the late 20th century opened up new vistas for sacrifice studies through a radical rethinking of the category “civilization”. Mazlish pioneered the deconstruction of the reified myth of “civilization”, revealing how it was shaped by colonial discourse into a static label of the “Other” (Mazlish 2004). Asad further dismantled the modern construction of “religion/ritual”, emphasizing the inseparability of ethics, law, and sacrificial practice in pre-modern civilizations, such as the Zhou ritual’s integrated model of “emerging from ritual, entering into punishment” (Asad 1993). This deconstructive movement revealed two key propositions:

• Sacrifice is inherently a field of power contestation—during the Shang–Zhou transition, the Zhou people transformed theocratic rule into a source of moral legitimacy by monopolizing the right to sacrifice to Heaven and reconstructing the discourse of “Heaven’s Mandate—Virtue”;
• Cross-cultural translation harbors pitfalls—the Western concept of “sacrifice” emphasizes the God–human dichotomy and the logic of atonement, failing to correspond to the ethical integrative function embodied in the Chinese concept of “ji” (祭), as expressed in “carefully attending to the funeral rites of parents and following them when gone with due reverence, the virtue of the people will resume its proper excellence” (shenzhong zhuiyuan, minde guihou 慎终追远，民德归厚).

Just as the essentialist paradigm faced challenges, Eisenstadt’s theory of “Multiple Modernities” injected new vitality into civilizational comparison. This framework emphasizes how Axial Age civilizations creatively transformed rituals through their “transcendental visions”, forming unique pathways of order construction (Eisenstadt 2000). His student Arnason specifically elucidated the Chinese model of “immanent transcendence”: Confucius’s famous dictum “sacrifice as if present”, marking the transformation of sacrifice from a medium for communicating with spirits into cultivation of virtue, where the subject’s sincerity and reverence became the core measure of ritual value (Arnason 2022). Assmann’s “Cultural Memory” theory further complemented the institutional dimension: inscriptions on Western Zhou bronze vessels, such as “dwelling here in the Central State” (zhai zi Zhongguo 宅兹中国), cast “virtue” as a symbol of ethnic identity; the ancestral temple Zhao–Mu system, through its spatial arrangement, gave corporeal transmission to the ethical principle of “honoring the honorable and cherishing the kin” (Assmann 2011). The significance of this constellation of theories lies in breaking free from functionalist–structuralist dualism, placing sacrifice within a dynamic network of “civilizational dialogue—institutional innovation—memory formation”, thereby providing a comparative historical fulcrum for understanding the Chinese ethical transformation.

Inspired by these new perspectives in civilizational theory, contemporary Chinese scholars have embarked on groundbreaking explorations of the Shang–Zhou sacrificial transformation and the construction of a mind–nature-based order. Reconstructing the Shang–Zhou transition became the primary focus: Chen Lai proposed the theory of “Pre-Axial Breakthrough”, revising the Jaspers paradigm, arguing that the core of this transformation was an ethical revolution from “spirit-centered shamanism” to “virtue-centered humanism”. Oracle bone inscriptions like “sacrificing ten Qiang captives” or “burning one hundred oxen” reveal the Shang logic of a “divine covenant”, where human sacrifices and offerings were exchanged for the “Di’s” (帝, high god) protection. In contrast, the Zhou reconstructed the Heaven–human relationship with “Heaven’s Mandate is not constant; it rests with those who possess virtue”, shifting the focus of sacrifice to “revering and illuminating virtue”. Wang Hui’s findings based on bronze inscriptions provide crucial material evidence—the appearance of the “heart” is radical in the character for virtue during the mid-Western Zhou, marking the change in the internalization of de from an external behavioral norm to an inner quality of mind–nature (jingshen qixin 敬慎其心). The practical mechanism of this transformation manifested as a dual movement:

Politically, the Duke of Zhou’s “instituting rites and music” stripped shamans of their privilege to communicate with spirits, transforming the sacrificial prerogative into a moral exemplar for the nobility. The declaration in the Book of Documents: Announcement of Shao (“王其德之用，祈天永命”, wang qi de zhi yong, qi tian yong ming—“Let the king use his virtue, praying to Heaven for an enduring mandate”) exemplifies this communication between Heaven and Humanity through virtue.

Ethically, lines like “the filial grandson has blessings” (xiao sun you qing) in the Book of Songs: Chu Ci show rituals shifting from placating spirits to expressing the descendants’ sincerity and reverence, making sacrifice a field for “tempering natural human feelings through cultural refinement” and moral cultivation.

The theory of mind–nature, as the philosophical cornerstone of order construction, has gained ontological depth in contemporary research. Based on the Guodian Chu bamboo text Xing Zi Ming Chu (“The Way begins in feelings; feelings are born of nature”—dao shi yu qing, qing sheng yu xing 道始于情，情生于性), Liang Tao refuted the Song Neo-Confucian dichotomy4 of “nature as substance, feelings as function”, arguing that familial affections are the source of benevolence and righteousness (T. Liang 2008). Chen Shaoming further elucidated the emotional transformative mechanism of ritual: Mourning rites (sangli 丧礼) such as “regulated weeping and jumping” (ku yong you jie 哭踊有节) sublimate natural grief into the virtue of reverence through formalized emotional expression (S. Chen 2008). Zhang Xianglong’s phenomenological interpretation reveals the temporal essence of sacrifice—when a filial son practices “serving the dead as if serving the living” in the ancestral temple, the repetitive act of bowing makes him realize his role as an intermediary in the “ancestor-descendant” chain. This vertical temporal consciousness breaks the boundaries of individual life and death, making the family an eternal ethical field, constituting the foundation of Chinese order and identity.

How are such mind–nature-based constructions externalized into the social order? Yu Zhiping analyzes the tripartite structure of the “temple system (miaozhi 庙制)—patrilineal clan system (zongfa 宗法)—well-field system (jingtian 井田)”: The Zhao–Mu system materializes hierarchical ethics through ancestral placements; the Song dynasty ancestral hall sacrificial fields (citang jitian 祠堂祭田), as communal property, sustained the lineage (zongzu 宗族), providing material support for “revering ancestors and binding the clan” (jingzong shouzu 敬宗收族). Wang Guowei had long pointed out that the Zhou temple system balanced blood ties and hierarchy through the principle of “cherishing kin and honoring the honorable” (qinqin zunzun 亲亲尊尊); the Song gentry’s promotion of popularized ancestral halls, while ostensibly “modifying” the form of Zhou rites, actually preserved the spiritual essence of “carefully attending to the funeral rites of parents and following them when gone with due reverence”, demonstrating the dialectical unity of institutional adaptability and ethical continuity. Huang Chin-shing’s Sino–Western comparison offers a reflective path: The Confucian Temple’s “enfeoffment system” (peixiang zhidu 配享制度) sacralized historical figures like Yan Hui and Zengzi, embodying a “this-worldly transcendence” based on “establishing virtue, establishing merit, establishing words” (lide ligong liyan 立德,立功,立言), fundamentally different from the logic of divine grace in the Christian Eucharist; and the Ming–Qing gentry-led popularization of ancestral halls further proves that ritual practice can actively shape social structure, rather than merely passively reflecting power relations (Huang 2010).

From the classical interpretations of the Functionalist and Annales schools and through the deconstruction and reconstruction of civilizational essentialism to the profound excavation by Chinese academia of “virtue internalization” and the “mind-nature-based order”, the study of sacrifice has broken through the unidimensional perspective of social integration. It has formed an interactive framework encompassing “ethical consciousness—institutional practice—civilizational dialogue”. The philosophization of “virtue” and the establishment of mind–nature theory during the Shang–Zhou transformation not only reshaped the ethical core of sacrifice, but also laid the logical foundation for the generation of order in Chinese civilization through the bond of “benevolence-reverence”. This unique pathway is neither Durkheimian social sacralization nor Malinowskian psychological compensation. Instead, it involves transforming the cosmic order into moral mind–nature through ritual propriety, and then externalizing this mind–nature into an ethical community through institutional design.

However, two core questions remain unanswered: How did China’s ethical–humanistic transformation unfold historically? And what specific theory of mind–nature ultimately crystallized through this process? Addressing these questions necessitates a deeper exploration within China’s own historical and intellectual contexts.

3. The Moralization of Sacrifice: The Confucian Reinterpretation of Classical Rituals

As Marcel Granet insightfully revealed through his sociological analysis of Confucian classics as “social facts”, Confucianism guided a humanistic and moral transformation of sacrificial practices. Many scholars of Chinese religion have similarly traced this trajectory of rationalization and humanization. A deeper understanding of this pivotal shift within sacrificial ritual not only elucidates its inherent humanistic implications, but also reveals the profound foundations upon which the Chinese socio-political order was constructed.

Liang Shuming posited that all human cultures originate from and revolve around religion. However, Chinese and Western civilizations diverged at the critical junctures of Christianity and Zhou–Confucian teachings. Confucian scholars, represented by Confucius, propelled Chinese civilization towards a turn from religion to morality. Religion emerges at the boundaries of human knowledge to stabilize emotions and dispositional nature (S. Liang [1949] 2011, p. 239). Within systems of religious belief, people rely on imagined external forces; however, all virtuous qualities attributed to these objects of worship fundamentally stem from human self-cultivation (S. Liang [1949] 2011, p. 234). Confucius and his followers focused on enlightening human rationality, nurturing moral character, and encouraging introspection, by weighing up human emotions to discern proper conduct.

Approaching this from an institutional history perspective in his study of Zhou dynasty political systems, Wang Kunpeng points out that the Confucian reinterpretation of sacrificial rites was not an isolated intellectual movement, but was deeply intertwined with contemporaneous political transformations (K. Wang 2022). Following the establishment of the Western Zhou, land and people were enfeoffed to nobles through the feudal system (fengjian), and the patriarchal clan system established hierarchies based on bloodlines. Within this institutional framework, sacrificial rituals were imbued with a new mission. Nobles of different ranks adhered to strict regulations regarding the scale of sacrifices, the types of offerings, and the procedures of ceremonies. Sacrifice thus became a crucial means of upholding the hierarchical system and reinforcing political authority. For instance, only the Son of Heaven (Tianzi 天子) could sacrifice to Heaven, Earth, and ancestors; feudal lords sacrificed to the mountains, rivers, and ancestors of their domain; ministers (dafu 大夫) sacrificed to the Five Household Sacrifices (wusi 五祀) and ancestors; and lower nobles (shi 士) could only sacrifice to their ancestors. This institutional design tightly linked sacrificial ritual with moral norms, making adherence to ritual propriety a vital expression of practicing morality and maintaining social order.

Confucianism systematically reinterpreted existing religious ceremonies: “From sacrifices to Heaven and ancestors to rituals for various spirits, the Confucian Way strenuously avoided any abrupt abolition that might alarm contemporaries, instead actively endowing these rites with appropriate emotional expression. These ceremonies could evoke lofty sentiments or sustain profound traditional affections, enabling individuals to cultivate virtue through sincere devotion and solemn practice” (S. Liang [1949] 2011, p. 89). Ding Sixin, in his research on pre-Qin philosophical thought, further elaborates that the Confucian infusion of emotion into sacrificial rites was not arbitrary, but grounded in a deep understanding of human nature (Ding 2015). They believed that human emotions require suitable vessels for expression, and that sacrificial rituals provided precisely such a platform. Through the solemnity and normativity of ritual, feelings of reverence, gratitude, and others were evoked within participants, thereby guiding them to practice morality in daily life.

Concretely, the Shang–Zhou transition constituted a pivotal turning point in the evolution of Chinese civilization. Chen Lai, drawing on Karl Jaspers’ concept of the “Axial Age”, situates this period accordingly. The so-called “Axial Age” refers to the key historical junctures where human thought and creativity established the fundamental categories and frameworks for subsequent development. Chen locates China’s “Axial Age” in the Spring and Autumn and Warring States periods, while simultaneously emphasizing the existence of an equally important pre-Axial period during the Shang–Zhou transition. This pre-Axial phase involved not only cultural breakthroughs, but humanistic transformation. Chen divides Chinese sacrificial culture into the pre-Xia shamanistic culture, Shang sacrificial culture, and Zhou ritual–music culture (liyue wenhua). The rationalization process of early Chinese culture evolved from magical practices to pious rituals, culminating in the rational normative system of Zhou ritual. The key factor driving this Shang–Zhou transformation was the rise of the concept of “virtue” (L. Chen 2017, pp. 5–15).

Archeological discoveries have revealed that Shang sacrificial remains frequently contain evidence of human sacrifice (rensheng 人牲) and human immolation (renxun 人殉). Oracle bone inscriptions from Yinxu also document numerous instances of frequent sacrifices to spirits, seeking blessings. This corroborates the characteristic Shang belief in divine power while neglecting moral cultivation, subordinating all affairs to the worship of deities. The supreme god “Di” (Di 帝) presided over nature and human affairs, while ancestors served as intermediaries “guests of Di”, possessing the power to bestow blessings or inflict calamities. Consequently, the elaborate annual sacrifices to Di and the ancestors consumed vast amounts of time and resources (Dong 1990, pp. 34–45). Shang beliefs maintained a particularistic relationship with “Di” and other spirits as protectors of the lineage, showing no concern for universal moral standards (Xu [1969] 2013, pp. 178–99). As Gu Jiegang and Liu Qiyu stated, “The Shang dynasty neither developed nor required the concept of de. They ruled by coercive power and theocratic authority, viewing Di’s will as absolute, unconditionally dispensing fortune or misfortune irrespective of human virtue. Their divination sought only to discern the divine will, not to assess moral propriety” (Gu and Liu 2005, p. 109).

Gan Huaizhen’s meticulous study of the Suburban Sacrifice (jiaosi 郊祀) during the Qin–Han period provides a counterpoint for understanding Shang sacrifice. During the Qin–Han era, with the establishment of the unified empire, rulers continuously reformed the Suburban Sacrifice, tightly integrating it with Confucian-promoted moral concepts and political order. For example, Emperor Wu of Han’s reforms incorporated the Confucian idea of “Heaven-Man resonance” (tianren ganying 天人感应), viewing sacrificial activities as vital channels for the Son of Heaven to communicate with Heaven and demonstrate the legitimacy of his rule, emphasizing that the emperor must possess virtue to receive Heaven’s blessing. This stands in stark contrast to the lack of moral norms in Shang sacrifice, highlighting the profound impact of the Zhou’s moral transformation of sacrifice (Gan 2008).

The Zhou conquest of the Shang catalyzed the conceptualization of “virtue”. The Zhou’s victory over a stronger adversary generated a deep sense of crisis consciousness, and lessons drawn from the Shang’s downfall spurred new conceptions of virtue (de) and the Mandate of Heaven (tianming 天命). As stated in the Odes (Daya 大雅), “The Mandate of Heaven is not constant” (Tianming michang), and the Zuo Commentary (Xi 5) records “August Heaven has no affections; it assists only the virtuous” (Huangtian wu qin, wei de shi fu 皇天无亲，惟德是辅). The Zhou revolution severed the Shang bond of divine–king unity, establishing “virtue” as the bridge connecting Heaven and the ancestors. Only those possessing virtue could obtain the Mandate of Heaven and legitimate rulership (Zhang 1993, p. 244). The early Zhou mentality of “reverence” and “revering virtue” gradually internalized into moral consciousness, laying the groundwork for Mencius’s theory of innate goodness (Xu [1969] 2013, p. 238).

Ding Sixin further analyzes that the Zhou concept of “virtue” encompassed multiple dimensions. Politically, it demanded rulers to implement benevolent governance (dezheng 德政) and care for the people. On the personal level, it emphasized the cultivation of individual moral qualities, such as integrity and humaneness. The formation of this concept of “virtue” not only altered the meaning of sacrifice, but also influenced the entire society’s value orientation. Correspondingly, ancestral sacrifice transformed from utilitarian prayers for blessings to rituals emphasizing sincere remembrance and inner reverence. As recorded in the Book of Rites·Meaning of Sacrifices (Liji·Jitong 礼记・祭统), “Sacrifice does not consist of things coming from outside; it issues from within, born from the heart… The sacrifice of the worthy is to bring to bear his integrity and faithfulness, together with his reverence. He presents the offerings, guides the ceremony with the rites, secures it with music, and times it according to the season; he offers them purely, without seeking anything from them. This is the heart of the filial son”.

Through the intellectual efforts of Confucius, Mencius, and later thinkers, orthodox Confucianism excavated and elucidated the inherent moral dimension of human nature, establishing the theory of innate goodness based on the natural human capacities for “love and reverence”. As Mencius·Jinxin I states, “That which people are capable of without learning is their innate ability (liangneng 良能). That which they know without reflection is their innate knowing (liangzhi 良知). Among young children, there are none that do not know to love their parents. When they grow older, there are none that do not know to revere their elder brothers. To love one’s parents is humaneness; to revere one’s elders is righteousness”. Thus, humaneness and righteousness are revealed as essential human qualities—the former manifesting as affectionate concern for others, the latter as reverential respect and self-restraint. This orientation, integrating both emotion and cognition, is rooted in family bonds and extends outward to broader social relationships.

Within the family structure, the Book of Rites·Great Treatise (Liji·Dazhuan 礼记·大传) elucidates a dual-axis operation: “Starting from humaneness and tracing back through parents, ascending step by step to the first ancestor, this is called ‘light’. Starting from righteousness and tracing down from the first ancestor, descending step by step to the deceased father, this is called ‘heavy’. The one light and the one heavy—such is the meaning of it”. The humaneness–kinship (ren-qin 人情) axis centers on the parent–child relationship, with affection diminishing as one ascends generations. Conversely, the righteousness–reverence axis accumulates reverence as one descends generations, because each ancestor carries the respect afforded to their predecessors. This ultimately forms a composite reverence that moves from the near to the distant, ascending to the ancestors.

Wang Kunpeng, from the perspective of institution–thought interaction, notes that this internal sacrificial order within the family complemented the Zhou patriarchal clan system. The patriarchal system, based on blood ties, established rules like primogeniture, while sacrificial rites reinforced the hierarchical order under this kinship structure. Through ancestral sacrifices, family members clarified their positions and responsibilities within the lineage, strengthening clan cohesion and thereby maintaining social stability. Rooted in this intrinsic moral quality, human relationships inherently embody the “affection-respect” (ai-jing 爱-敬) dynamic connecting life and death: “When alive, they are reverently cared for; when dead, they are reverently sacrificed to”.

The principles of humaneness–righteousness, the love for kin (qinqin 亲亲), and the reverence for the honorable (zunzun 尊尊) together constitute the foundation for constructing relational order extending from the familial to the socio-political realm. As insightfully noted by Mou Zongsan, “Qinqin and zunzun fundamentally arise from human nature. These principles transform abstract human relationships into ethical constants (lun chang 伦常) with concrete content. Through the interaction between ethical relationships and human nature, moral consciousness manifests itself—in Confucius as humaneness-righteousness, expanded by Mencius into humaneness, righteousness, ritual propriety, and wisdom as manifested in the heart-minds of compassion, shame, deference, and discernment. Thus, the concept of ’virtue’ is brought to completion… The ethical relationships and moral consciousness underlying the ritual-music system constitute eternal principles transcending historical change” (Mou 2010, p. 211).

Gan Huaizhen’s research also shows that the evolution of the Suburban Sacrifice during the Qin–Han period was precisely a continuation of this construction of moral order from the family to the socio-political realm. The Suburban Sacrifice evolved from a simple offering to Heaven, Earth, and the spirits, gradually incorporating Confucian moral concepts and political ideals, becoming an important instrument for maintaining the ruling order of the unified empire. As the Son of Heaven, the emperor, through conducting the grand Suburban Sacrifice ceremony, demonstrated his virtue to the realm, he emphasized the legitimacy of his rule, and simultaneously guided the moral ethos of the entire society.

The concept of “virtue” and the principles of humaneness–righteousness within Chinese civilization gradually formed through historical evolution. However, because these concepts originated from the rational reflection and profound experiential insights of ancient sages, they fundamentally resonate with the deepest aspects of human nature. Once established, these concepts acquired remarkable constancy and stability, thereby laying the profound and solid foundation of Chinese civilization. Having elucidated the Confucian theory of human nature centered on ren yi within Chinese cultural philosophy, we can now systematically explore the ontological connection between the rites of ancestral sacrifice and the dispositional nature of humanity. This connection manifests not only in the shaping of human nature by sacrificial ritual, but also in the transmission and development of ritual by human nature.

4. Moral Virtue as the Foundation of Traditional Social Order

Chinese civilization underwent a crucial process of rationalization during the transition from the Shang to the Zhou dynasty. Within this transformation, Confucian sacrificial rituals acquired rationalized and moralized humanistic significance, while their original shamanistic and religious components gradually diminished.

In the Confucian sacrificial system, ancestor worship occupied a central position. Concerns regarding spirits and deities (gui shen 鬼神) within this system were further transformed into a philosophical understanding of the essence of life. Confucians posited that life originates from the union of “hun” (魂, ethereal soul) and “po” (魄, corporeal soul), while death signifies their separation. “Po” refers to the sensory and motor functions of the physical organs, while “hun” denotes the emotional consciousness and spiritual essence derived from the vital breath (qi 气). After death, the physical form returns to the earth, and the “po” transforms into ghosts (gui 鬼); the refined “qi” ascends, and the “hun” becomes deities (shen 神). Following the funeral, descendants, through sacrificial rites, welcome back the deceased’s “po” to reunite with the “hun”. This transitional ritual connecting burial with formal ancestral sacrifice is known as the “Yu” (虞) ceremony. Subsequent periodic sacrifices aimed to attach the spiritual essence of “hun” and “po” to the ancestral tablets in the lineage temple, enabling descendants to communicate with the ancestral spirits in a state of reverential concentration. Essentially, the sacrificial ritual symbolically “resurrected” the ancestors within the consciousness of their descendants, forging a continuity of existence wherein the descendants’ minds and bodies became extensions of their ancestors within the patrilineal lineage (Qian 2004, p. 23).

This ritual system reveals how Chinese life is rooted in an exceptionally dense network of ethical relationships: the body is regarded as a legacy from one’s parents, the spiritual essence is an inheritance from them, and an individual’s actions, virtues, and self-cultivation are intrinsically linked to the ancestors, demanding unremitting diligence. As stated in the “Classic of Filial Piety” (xiao jing 孝经), “Our bodies—to every hair and bit of skin—are received by us from our parents, and we must not presume to injure or wound them. This is the beginning of filial piety. When we have established our character by the practice of the filial way, so as to make our name famous in future ages and thereby glorify our parents, this is the end of filial piety”. Filial piety (xiao 孝), centered on love (ai 爱) and reverence (jing 敬), constitutes the fundamental disposition of the Chinese mentality. All virtues and the attitude of benevolence (ren 仁) towards others stem from this, simultaneously bestowing value and meaning upon Chinese existence.

This psychological orientation formed the deep structural foundation of traditional Chinese political and social organization. The ultimate goal of traditional governance was to cultivate this profound and sincere emotional disposition. “Li” (礼, ritual propriety) served as the primary mechanism for achieving this objective. As stated in the “Li Yun” chapter of the “Book of Rites” (Liji 礼记), “What are human feelings (qing 情)? Pleasure, anger, sorrow, fear, love, dislike, and desire—these seven are what humans are capable of without learning… How then could the sage govern these seven feelings, cultivate the ten cardinal duties (yi 义), promote trust and harmony, esteem courtesy and deference, and eliminate contention—if not by means of “li”?…” Therefore, human feelings are the field of the sage-kings; they cultivate it with “li”. From the Confucian perspective, “emotions” are the activation of human nature; “li” is rooted in the inherent, balanced (zhong 中) emotional state described in the “Doctrine of the Mean” (Zhongyong 中庸): “Before the feelings of pleasure, anger, sorrow, and joy are aroused, it is called equilibrium. When these feelings are aroused and each and all attain due measure and degree, it is called harmony. Equilibrium is the great root of the world. Harmony is its universal path (dadao 达道)”. Through “li”’s restraint of excessive emotions and cultivation of deficient ones, achieving balanced emotional expression became the ultimate political goal. The “Doctrine of the Mean” further asserts the following: “What Heaven (Tian 天) imparts to humans is called human nature. To follow our nature is called the Way (Dao 道). Cultivating the Way is called education (jiao 教). True governance (zhi 治) lies in guiding people, through education, to return to the harmonious nature endowed by the cosmos, thereby allowing their innate nature to fully develop”.

Similarly to Radcliffe-Brown’s (1952) theoretical framework, “li” and “qing” held central positions in traditional Chinese social thought. However, Radcliffe-Brown failed to recognize their shared ontological foundation in humanity’s innate, perfectly balanced nature.

Ancestral sacrificial rituals emerged within the liminal space between life and death, where human emotions find their most authentic expression. They were institutionalized as crucial instruments for political cultivation. The Zhou dynasty’s replacement of the Shang marked a shift in sacrificial practice from theocratic rule to humanistic moral cultivation, establishing ethical education as the fundamental political principle. The sacrificial system encompassed three cosmic realms: Celestial Deities (tianshen 天神), Earthly Spirits (diqi 地祇), and Human Ancestral Spirits (rengui 人鬼).

The Son of Heaven (Tianzi 天子) monopolized the privilege of sacrificing to Heaven, symbolizing the resonance between the ruler’s moral virtue and the Mandate of Heaven (Tianming 天命). His governance aimed to internalize the Way of Heaven (Tiandao 天道) as personal virtue, and through timely governance and modeling Heaven, to nourish the people’s livelihoods and guide human nature (S. Lin 1997, p. 244). Earth sacrifices (di ji 地祭) primarily expressed communal gratitude for material sustenance while reinforcing the political hierarchy (S. Lin 1997, p. 125). Ancestor worship extended familial affection to clan ethics. Political morality based on loyalty was disseminated through institutional implementation and the ruler’s exemplary conduct, embedding ethical education within religious practice (S. Lin 1997, pp. 129–53).

These humanized rituals ultimately revealed the tripartite cosmic order of Heaven–Earth–Humanity and their harmonious symbiosis, embodying an attitude towards life that integrated reverence for nature with remembrance of the ancestors. Consequently, the connotation of sacrifice completed its turn from superstition to humanistic philosophy, expanding into a cosmology of reverent coexistence among all things.

However, some scholars invert this causality, arguing that actual power dynamics constituted the fundamental basis of sacrificial practices. Zhang Hequan contends that “beneath the veneer of deity worship, sacrificial activities essentially manifest social relationships between humans” (Zhang 1993, p. 10). He proposes that Zhou rulers utilized sacrificial rituals to consolidate their rule.

Sacrifices to Heaven (ji tian 祭天): The Son of Heaven’s monopoly on this rite deified royal authority, strengthening imperial power and enhancing control over subordinate society (Zhang 1993, p. 38).

Cult of the Earth God (She Shen 社神): The Earth God, originating from agrarian land worship, evolved into a territorial deity governing social life. The hierarchical establishment of royal and feudal lords’ altars (she tan 社坛) directly linked land ownership with governance, with sacrificial privileges symbolizing political dominance. Distributing sacrificial meat (fen zuo 分胙) maintained relations between rulers and nobles, while state-controlled public altars became a crucial mechanism for controlling the rural populace (Zhang 1993, p. 69).

Ancestral Temple Sacrifices (zongmiao jisi 宗庙祭祀): These were inseparable from political needs. The ruler’s political–economic status and power were encoded in sacrificial privileges; policies were implemented under the guise of honoring the ancestors; temple sacrifices maintained noble alliances. For scholar officials, kinship ties superseded political connections, with clan patriarchs maintaining patrilineal cohesion through the control of sacrificial rights (Zhang 1993, p. 117).

At the same time as acknowledging historical instances of utilizing the sacrificial system for governance, reducing it entirely to utilitarian power mechanisms reflects a reductive anthropological presupposition. As Liang Shuming insightfully observed, human nature encompasses both corporeal desires for status/power and transcendental spiritual aspirations. The former satisfies superficial cravings, while the latter provides existential fulfillment (S. Liang [1949] 2011, p. 88). Religious and sacrificial practices precisely respond to this latter dimension of human need. Confucian ritual propriety particularly emphasizes inner sincerity and devotion. Confucius himself disdained perfunctory ritual performance: The “Analects” (Lunyu 论语) records, “As for the “Di” sacrifice, after the libation, I have no wish to look on”, and “Sacrifice as if the ancestor/deity were present. Sacrifice to the spirits as if the spirits were present. The Master said, ‘If I am not fully present at the sacrifice, it is as if I did not sacrifice.’” If sacrifice were merely a political tool, public disdain for such manipulation would ultimately undermine its intended effects.

Sacrificial rituals, emerging during the Zhou–Confucian era, underwent formal adaptations throughout history while retaining their enduring humanistic essence. Temple systems particularly embodied this dialectic of continuity and change. Wang Guowei noted that the Zhou system prioritized moral cultivation through two fundamental principles: familial affection and hierarchical respect. The primogeniture system, derived from “zun zun”, formed the patrilineal lineage system (zongfa zhidu 宗法制度). Temple institutions based on “qin qin” restricted ancestral sacrifices to four generations up to the great-great-grandfather, with the number of temples stratified by rank: the Son of Heaven had seven temples (four for immediate ancestors plus three distant progenitor temples), feudal lords had five, high ministers (dafu 大夫) three, and the lower gentry one (shi 士), while commoners (shuren 庶人) had no temple and sacrificed at home (G. Wang [1917] 2008, p. 211). Later scholars extended this analysis, viewing ancestral law, temple institutions, and mourning regulations (sangfu zhidu 丧服制度) as the core of the lineage system. While Zhou dynasty clan cohesion relied on reverence for patriarchal authority, Song dynasty scholars like Zhang Zai, Cheng Yi, and Zhu Xi reformed temple institutions, allowing commoners to sacrifice to remote ancestors. This move seemingly contravened Zhou ritual form, but preserved its essential spirit. Under feudalism, stratified temples prevented usurpation and ensured hierarchical sacrifice. Post-Song transformations in clan structure necessitated temple reform to revitalize filial piety and clan solidarity, ultimately leading to the ancestral hall (citang 祠堂) system that dominated Chinese kinship organization for nearly a millennium (Wu 2012, p. 45). These institutional adaptations demonstrate how the sacrificial system interacted with social structures—its forms evolved with historical conditions, yet its ethical core endured.

5. Conclusions

Through comparative analysis of Chinese and Western traditions, this study discerns the profound foundations and distinctive essence of Chinese civilization embedded within ancestral worship rituals. The ethical transformation during the Shang–Zhou transition established “virtue”, “affectivity”, and “human relations” as the moral bedrock of sociopolitical order, simultaneously cultivating reverence and gratitude of the cosmic–natural order. From a diachronic perspective, the sacrificial institutions of the Zhou dynasty manifested enduring “ethical rationality”; while ritual forms adapted to sociocultural changes, their humanistic core remained continuous. This principle of “adaptive continuity” became internalized within China’s social psyche and structures, crystallizing into the timeless paradigm of “reforming rituals while preserving righteousness”.

First, Chinese civilization developed a unique theory of human nature centered on “ren” (仁, benevolence) and “yi” (义, righteousness). The legitimacy of ritual systems—exemplified by ancestral veneration—resides in humanity’s “inherent moral nature”. Unlike Western theories of religious origins (e.g., Tylor’s animism, Malinowski’s functionalism, or Durkheimian collective consciousness), Confucianism posits a fundamentally distinct view: the defining quality of humanity lies neither in natural desires nor abstract sociality, but in the “innate moral consciousness” (liangzhi 良知) and “intuitive moral capacity” (liangneng 良能), manifesting through “loving reverence” (ai-jing 爱敬). Rooted in this moral nature, Confucian rituals express filial piety through sincere devotion to the ancestors, extending this reverential attitude toward communion with cosmic forces, thereby forging an “ethico-affective approach” to nature and existence.

Second, the intellectual innovations of the Zhou era—particularly Confucius’ rationalizing efforts and cultivation of the “ethico-spiritual personality” (dexing renge 德性人格)—fundamentally reconstituted sacrificial practice. This shift replaced the Shang dynasty’s utilitarian supplications and superstitious mentality with moral consciousness as the basis for relational governance. As Confucian thought elucidates, the value of sacrifice derives from the “benevolent virtues” sincerely demonstrated by practitioners. Though historically formed, this moral nature and spiritual personality achieved remarkable stability through empirical embodiment and rational reflection, ultimately becoming an enduring hallmark of Chinese civilization.

Third, China’s collective consciousness primarily manifests as “vertical integration” within familial structures. The moral nature of humanity finds expression through kinship-based “affection” (qinqin 亲亲) and “reverence” (zunzun 尊尊). Ancestral temple rituals perpetuate the spiritual legacy and ethical achievements of forebearers within descendants’ consciousness, generating an “existential imperative”: individuals must preserve their inherited “corporeal-spiritual essence” (shenxin benzhi 身心本质) and enhance familial honor. This vertical orientation resonates with Fei Xiaotong’s insight: “While deeply intrigued by Durkheim’s ‘collective consciousness,’ as a Chinese scholar I find it necessary to reorient its horizontal interpersonal framework vertically. In our tradition, the individual serves as a nexus linking past and future generations. The present, as an intermediary phase, bears eternal responsibility toward the ancestors and future-oriented obligations toward descendants” (Fei 2009, p. 210).

Fourth, the ethical framework embedded in sacrificial rites constitutes the deep foundation of China’s sociopolitical order. Unlike the Annales school’s tracing of social order to primitive religious consciousness or Radcliffe-Brown’s emphasis on the ritualistic “standardization of affect”, the Chinese paradigm diverges fundamentally: the sacredness underlying social structure and ritual origins stems from humanity’s “Heaven-endowed moral nature” (tianming zhi xing 天命之性). The relationship between affect, ritual, and social structure reveals complexities surpassing functionalist interpretations. China’s sociopolitical order ultimately rests upon human “benevolence” and its corollary affective dispositions—“ai-jing” (loving reverence). This inner nature resonates with the “Way of Heaven” (tiandao 天道) and “Mandate of Heaven” (tianming 天命), possessing transcendent sanctity. “Li” (ritual propriety) arises from “modulated affective expressions” grounded in this nature, while institutional frameworks (e.g., lineage systems, mourning rites, and sacrifices) cultivate innate goodness. By harmonizing emotional expression with ethical relationships, they actualize a virtuous social order. Through ritual practice, Chinese civilization continually revitalizes family-centered ethico-affective bonds and extends them to the sociopolitical sphere. Consequently, the “moral triad” of “benevolence-righteousness”, “affection-reverence”, and “loving reverence” constitutes the irreducible core of China’s sociopolitical architecture (Zhou 2021).