Filial piety.
Serve them living, bury them by the rites, sacrifice to them after — and do not damage the body they gave you, which is why Chinese men historically did not cut their hair. It outranks the state: asked about an upright son who reported his father for stealing a sheep, Confucius said that in his village uprightness meant the father covering for the son and the son for the father.
Xiao, filial piety, is the root virtue and the Classic of Filial Piety states its three stages: serving parents while they live, burying them according to the rites, and sacrificing to them thereafter. The prohibition on damaging the body received from one's parents is taken seriously enough to have shaped practice — it is a reason Chinese men historically did not cut their hair, and it complicated the acceptance of surgery, tattooing and cremation. The sharpest illustration of its priority over civic obligation is Analects 13.18, where the Duke of She boasts of an upright man in his district who reported his father for stealing a sheep, and Confucius replies that in his own district uprightness is different: the father conceals for the son and the son conceals for the father, and uprightness is found in that. Legal codes followed: imperial Chinese law generally exempted close relatives from the duty to inform, and the principle survives in modified form in contemporary Chinese and Taiwanese criminal procedure, which is a live comparative-law subject.
The Duke of She said: in my district there is a man of upright conduct — his father stole a sheep, and he bore witness against him. Confucius said: in my district the upright are different. The father conceals for the son, and the son conceals for the father — and uprightness is found in this.
Analects 13.18 (rendered)Kinship obligation over civic duty, stated without hedging; imperial law followed.
The same ground, other faiths
claims that share this one's ideasSign in to open the first thread. Everything here is attributed.