Zhong Wen: Matteo Ricci once said that the Chinese people, not understanding logic, suffered from confused thinking; and that a lack of true faith led to the flourishing of superstition. Ricci’s Notes on China was an “internal document,” unlike what he publicly read to the Chinese, and therefore every word is written “in blood”: “Just as the people here are extremely superstitious, they also care little about truth. They act with extreme caution and rarely trust anyone.”

Ricci did not prostrate himself before Chinese civilization; nor did his introduction of European achievements suddenly open the eyes of the Chinese. In fact, the main purpose of his writings was to convince the Church of the success of his missionary work, and thus unavoidably exaggerated his influence.

Even so, between the lines, readers can still see—just as with later missionaries—that his greatest frustration was that the Chinese regarded him as a barbarian.

From this we can conclude that the Chinese “Celestial Empire mentality” began at least as early as the Ming dynasty. It was not something the Manchu Tatars brought from outside the passes. Such cultural arrogance could not have arisen among the culturally underdeveloped Manchus of the time. The reason for this sense of civilizational superiority was, as Ricci explained, China’s natural geographic isolation: surrounded by barbarous nations, lacking a maritime tradition of exploration, and enforcing a strict agrarian policy that suppressed commerce. Naturally, the Chinese became like the subjects of the “Night-Lang Kingdom,” convinced that they were the world’s center.

Bo Ya: You’re right. The reality of China and the imagination Europeans had about it were far apart—there is always another side to every question, namely its practical side beyond theory.

Zhong Wen: The scholar-official class was not really interested in “moral philosophy,” but in the civil service examinations and becoming officials. Mathematics and the natural sciences never developed in China because the Chinese government did not value them and never included them in the examination system.

Bo Ya: Neo-Confucianism of the Song and Ming was really “death-seeking Confucianism.” It brought China to ruin twice—first in the Song and then in the Ming. But the Chinese remained infatuated with it, and the Manchus themselves later promoted it, only to perish a third time at the hands of the Eight-Nation Alliance.

Zhong Wen: Ricci wrote in Notes on China: *“The Chinese consider all foreigners to be ignorant barbarians, and use such expressions when referring to them. They even disdain learning anything from the books of foreigners, believing that only they themselves possess true science and knowledge. If they occasionally mention foreigners in their writings, they unhesitatingly treat them as creatures of the forests and wilderness. Even the written term they use for ‘foreigner’ is the same as that used for wild beasts. Rarely do they grant foreigners a name more honorable than the one they give to animals.

It is hard to believe how suspicious they are of envoys or ambassadors sent by neighboring countries to pay tribute or conduct diplomatic affairs. Even when friendly relations have existed since ancient times, this does not prevent visiting dignitaries from being treated like captives or prisoners throughout their entire journey, forbidden to look at anything along the way. During their stay they are housed in buildings within the palace precincts that resemble cattle sheds, and are locked inside.

They are never allowed to see the emperor. Their diplomatic business is handled only through ministerial intermediaries. Throughout the empire no one may have contact with foreigners, except at specific times and in specific places, such as the Macau peninsula, where since 1557 a trading post with the Portuguese has existed. Anyone engaging in trade with foreigners without official permission is punished with the most severe penalties.”*

“Because they do not know the size of the earth and yet are filled with overconfidence, the Chinese believe that among all nations only China is worthy of admiration. In terms of the size of the state, its political system, and its scholarly reputation, they not only consider all other peoples as barbarians, but as irrational animals. In their view, nowhere else are there kings, dynasties, or cultures worth boasting about. The greater their ignorance, the greater their pride—and once the truth becomes known to them, the deeper their shame.”

Bo Ya: Clearly Ricci remained a Euro-centrist at heart. The respect—even admiration—he displayed toward China in front of the Chinese was a protective coloration, a safety disguise. In his writings for Europeans he stated that “Chinese moral philosophy is nothing but a series of confused maxims and conclusions.”

Zhong Wen: From the Western empirical point of view, Ricci believed that China’s only relatively advanced philosophical science was moral philosophy—but even there, “because they introduced errors, they not only failed to clarify matters but made them more confused.” He noted: “They have no concept of logical rules, and thus when handling ethical precepts they never consider the internal connections between branches of the subject. Among them, ethics is merely a series of confused maxims and speculations reached under the dim light of reason.”

Bo Ya: Ricci did not investigate deeply enough. What he sensed was in fact closely related to the structural differences between the Chinese and European languages, which inevitably created obstacles to communication.

Zhong Wen: Ricci pointed out China’s deficiencies in astronomy, geometry, and other early sciences, but he also understood the cause: “Anyone who hopes to gain fame in philosophy would never exert himself to study mathematics or medicine. As a result, almost no one devotes himself to these disciplines unless household duties or lack of talent prevent him from pursuing what are considered higher studies. Mathematics and medicine are not respected, because they do not bring the honors that philosophical studies bring.”

He added that students were drawn to ethics because the degrees it provided represented “the pinnacle of happiness for a Chinese scholar.”

On ritual, Ricci observed that in China it was excessively formalized: “Their rituals are so numerous that they waste most of their time. Anyone familiar with their customs must regret this. Why do they not abandon such superficial displays?”

Bo Ya: The determining factor here is a social custom rooted in underlying supply-and-demand dynamics.

Zhong Wen: Regarding China’s monarchical system, Ricci wrote that it “is governed by the scholarly class, commonly called philosophers. The responsibility for orderly governing the entire state rests wholly in their hands.” The examination system, which selected these “philosophers,” seemed to Ricci “strange and somewhat ineffective to Europeans… In all the examinations, the examiners are always chosen from among senior philosophers. No military experts, mathematicians, or physicians are ever included.”

On bureaucratic politics he wrote: “The penal laws do not seem too harsh, but the number of people illegally executed by ministers is about the same as the number legally executed.” Bribery and arbitrary beatings were widespread.

He noted de facto slavery among domestic servants: many poor men sold themselves to wealthy households in hopes of marrying a maid, thereby condemning their descendants to bondage. Poverty made many parents sell their own children for the price of a pig or a cheap mule. Countless slaves were born within their own cities.

On infanticide he wrote: “In some provinces the drowning of female infants is practiced openly… They justify this horrible act by claiming it spares the child from suffering and allows her to be reborn into a better family.”

On suicide: thousands killed themselves every year out of resentment, misfortune, cowardice, or to escape blame.

On religion, Ricci concluded that Confucianism, Buddhism, and Daoism had merged into a confused syncretism: “By thinking they could honor all three teachings simultaneously, they ended up having no real religion at all… most openly admit they have no religion, and by pretending belief, end in atheism.”

Superstition thus flourished: astrologers, geomancers, fortune-tellers, and charlatans infested every public place, swindling people of all classes—including high officials and even the emperor.

Bo Ya: These types still jump up and down in 21st-century Chinese societies. If they truly had prophetic powers, why not secure a better fate for themselves?

Zhong Wen: Genuine devotion may appear naive, but at least it draws boundaries for what one will or will not do. The Chinese attitude of “respecting spirits from a distance” or merely believing “just in case” is fundamentally hypocritical—a utilitarian opportunism. Ricci saw through this: although idols were everywhere, “few truly believed.” They worshipped idols because “even if useless, it could do no harm.”

Bo Ya: This resembles the French thinker Pascal’s “wager of belief.” No wonder the French were fond of adopting Chinese culture.

Zhong Wen: Ricci continued: the Chinese spent huge efforts calculating eclipses and planetary movements but their results were full of errors. Their astronomy degenerated into astrology. The Saracens introduced some mathematical knowledge centuries earlier, but mostly in the form of tables lacking rigorous proof. The founder of the Ming dynasty (Hongwu) restricted astronomy to hereditary families out of fear that those who understood celestial signs might disrupt imperial order.

On law, Ricci wrote: “China has no ancient legal code like our Twelve Tables or Justinian’s Code… Each new dynasty creates its own laws… They know nothing of the world beyond their borders and believe the entire world is contained within their empire.”

Bo Ya: Today the Communist regime is still like this—arbitrarily issuing “policies,” assuming it can reshape global order.

Zhong Wen: On superstition: “The most common superstition is the belief that the outcome of everything depends entirely on choosing the right day and hour… They imagine a family’s entire safety depends on whether a door opens here or there, whether water flows from one side or the other, whether a roof is higher or lower. What could be more absurd?”

Bo Ya: This is the so-called “feng shui.” Even today many Chinese make money selling such nonsense.

Zhong Wen: Exactly—Ricci saw the same thing centuries ago. According to the Gospel proverb, they are truly “the blind leading the blind.”

On eunuchs: in the northern provinces, large numbers of boys were castrated to serve the emperor. Tens of thousands lived in the palace—uneducated, feeble, incapable of understanding or executing important orders.

Bo Ya: That seems to imply the southern provinces had fewer candidates for eunuchs—hinting at differences between “South China” and “North China.”

Zhong Wen: Ricci observed deep mutual distrust between ruler and subjects. Officials were so tyrannical that no one felt his property was safe. The emperor traveled like someone moving in enemy territory, surrounded by elaborate security.

As for the imperial clan, Ricci called them a parasitic class: more than sixty thousand lived on public stipends, doing no work, indulging in pleasure, and growing increasingly unruly.

For soldiers, military service was mere drudgery without patriotism or honor. Weapons were useless, often merely fake ones for drills. Soldiers and officers alike were subject to beatings like schoolchildren.

On architecture: “Chinese buildings are inferior to European ones in style and durability. They build for one lifetime, not for posterity… They cannot understand buildings that last hundreds or thousands of years.” Their foundations were shallow; buildings decayed quickly unless constantly repaired.

Bo Ya: Because the Chinese pagans do not believe in an eternal Creator, their souls—and their civilization—cannot attain permanence. Thus they chase after illusory techniques of longevity instead.