ThislineofreasoningledmetowhatmaybecalledthereligionofSocialImmortality, becauseitisessentiallybasedontheideathattheindividualself, whichistheproductoftheaccumulatedeffectofthesocialself, leavesanindeliblemarkofeverythingitisandeverythingitdoesuponthatlargerselfwhichmaybetermedSociety, orHumanity, , , meritandsin, allhisactionandthoughtandspeech, significantortrivial, rightorwrong, forgoodorforevil—.
ThisconceptionofSocialImmortalityismoresatisfactorythantheancientChinesedoctrineoftheThreeImmortalitiesinthatitincludesthelowlyandtheinsignificantaswellastheheroesandsages, viceaswellasvirtue, , , ,butatinysputumfromaconsumptivemaykillmultitudesandgenerations.
Trulytheevilthatmendolivesafterthem! , , , “Afterus, thedeluge”? Orshallwesay, “Afterus, themillennium” ?
* * * *
“ScienceandOurPhilosophyofLife” , publishedinaweeklypapereditedbymyself, .Whenthecontroversialliteraturewascollectedbysomeenterprisingpublisherattheendof1923， itamountedtoover250，.Myintroductoryessayaddedanother10，000wordstothisalreadyvoluminouscollectionandconcludedwithwhatIproposedas “aframeworkforanewphilosophyoftheuniverseandlife,” towhich, however, someofthehostileChristianmissionarieshavemischievouslygiventhenameof “HuShih’sNewDecalogue.” Inowtranslateitforwhatitisworth:
, weshouldrecognizethattheworldofspaceisinfinitelylarge
, weshouldrec- ognizethattheuniverseextendsoverinfinitetime
— “natural” intheChinesesenseof “beingsoofthemselves”—andthatthereisnoneedfortheconceptofasupernaturalRulerorCreator.
