Introduction: A Vision of Ideal Governance

In the rich tapestry of classical Chinese philosophy, few concepts have captured the human imagination as powerfully as the dichotomy between “Great Unity” . These competing visions of social organization, articulated most famously in the Liyun chapter of the Book of Rites, represent one of humanity’s earliest systematic attempts to conceptualize ideal governance and social harmony. This philosophical framework, attributed to Confucius and his disciples, not only reflected on past golden ages but also established enduring standards against which all subsequent societies would be measured. The tension between these two ideals—one representing perfect communal harmony, the other representing the best achievable order within imperfect reality—would echo through Chinese political thought for millennia, influencing reformers, revolutionaries, and philosophers across generations.

Historical Context: The Spring and Autumn Period

The development of these concepts emerged during a time of significant social and political transformation. The Spring and Autumn Period witnessed the gradual decline of Zhou dynasty authority, increasing warfare between competing states, and the fragmentation of traditional social structures. It was against this backdrop of instability that Confucius and other philosophers began to reflect on better ways to organize human society. The perceived moral decay and political chaos of their contemporary world stood in stark contrast to the idealized past they described, making their philosophical project both a historical analysis and a contemporary critique.

Confucius himself served as Minister of Crime in the state of Lu, giving him firsthand experience with governance and the challenges of maintaining social order. His participation in official ceremonies, including the annual Zhu sacrifice mentioned in the text, provided the context for his philosophical reflections. These rituals, intended to maintain cosmic and social harmony, became occasions for deeper contemplation about the nature of an ideal society and how far his contemporary world had fallen from this standard.

The Golden Age of Great Unity

The concept of Datong, or Great Unity, represents Confucius’s vision of a perfect social order that existed during the era of the Five Emperors and Three Sovereigns—mythical sage-rulers from China’s deepest antiquity. In this idealized world, the “Great Way” prevailed throughout society, creating conditions of perfect harmony and justice. The fundamental principle organizing this society was that “all under heaven belonged to everyone,” establishing a communal rather than private conception of property and power.

In this utopian arrangement, leadership was based solely on merit and virtue. The community selected the most worthy and capable individuals to govern, regardless of their birth or connections. These leaders maintained their positions through moral authority rather than coercion, governing through example rather than force. Social relations were characterized by perfect trust and harmony, with people keeping their commitments and maintaining peaceful coexistence.

The social welfare system of the Datong era ensured that all members of society were properly cared for according to their needs. The elderly could live out their years in security and comfort, those in their prime could contribute their skills and energies meaningfully, and the vulnerable—including widows, orphans, and the disabled—received necessary support. This comprehensive care system emerged naturally from the communal spirit that permeated society, rather than being imposed through administrative structures.

Economic life in the Datong era reflected its communal values. People disliked seeing resources wasted or left unused, but they did not seek to accumulate personal wealth. Similarly, people were concerned about not contributing their abilities fully to society, but this concern stemmed from a desire to serve the community rather than advance personal interests. With everyone’s needs met and no one seeking excessive personal gain, criminal behavior virtually disappeared. Houses needed no locked doors because theft and robbery were unknown. This was the essence of the Great Unity—a society functioning in perfect harmony without need for coercion or elaborate legal systems.

The Transition to Modest Prosperity

According to Confucian historical analysis, this golden age could not last forever. The text describes how the “Great Way gradually faded,” marking the transition from the era of Great Unity to that of Modest Prosperity during the Xia, Shang, and Zhou dynasties. This shift represented a decline from perfect communal society to a more pragmatic system that acknowledged human imperfections while still maintaining basic order and justice.

In this new era, “all under heaven became the possession of individual families,” establishing the principle of private property and hereditary rule. People began to care primarily for their own relatives and children rather than the broader community. Resources were accumulated for personal benefit, and labor was performed for individual advantage rather than communal good. The ruling class established hereditary succession as the norm, with political power passing from father to son within family lines.

To protect their private possessions and maintain their power, rulers constructed fortified cities with walls and moats. This physical separation reflected the broader social fragmentation that had occurred since the era of Great Unity. Despite this decline, the text acknowledges that exemplary rulers like Yu of Xia, Tang of Shang, King Wen, King Wu, King Cheng, and the Duke of Zhou emerged during this period. These leaders used ritual principles to bring stability to chaotic times, making them the outstanding figures of the Modest Prosperity era.

The key distinction between these two eras lay in their governing principles. While the Great Unity period operated through spontaneous moral harmony, the Modest Prosperity era required conscious adherence to ritual principles (li) to maintain order. These rituals provided the framework through which society could function despite the loss of perfect communal spirit.

The Role of Ritual in Maintaining Social Order

As the Great Way faded, ritual became increasingly important as the mechanism for preserving social harmony. Confucius emphasized that ritual represented the way ancient kings aligned human society with cosmic principles and properly regulated human emotions and relationships. Ritual provided structure for various aspects of social life, including mourning ceremonies, sacrifices, village ceremonies, coming-of-age ceremonies, weddings, and official audiences.

The text presents ritual as having existed alongside heaven and earth since time immemorial, giving it cosmic significance beyond mere human convention. Those who occupied positions of authority without following proper ritual were considered calamities upon their people. This perspective elevated ritual from mere custom to essential foundation of civilized society.

Confucius lamented the contemporary disregard for ritual principles among those in power. He attributed this decline to the damage done to the Zhou way by Kings You and Li, whose poor rule had corrupted the traditions established by earlier Zhou kings. Even in Lu, the state that preserved Zhou rituals most faithfully, Confucius found serious deviations from proper practice in its suburban and ancestral sacrifices.

The preservation of proper ritual in states like Qi and Song, which maintained sacrifices to their founding rulers Yu and Xie respectively, stood in contrast to the degeneration occurring elsewhere. These rituals connected contemporary society to its foundational principles, serving as reminders of the better governance that had once prevailed.

Cultural and Social Impacts

The Datong-Xiaokang dichotomy profoundly influenced Chinese political philosophy and social thought. It established a framework for evaluating rulers and governments based on their approximation of these ideals rather than merely their effectiveness in maintaining power. This philosophical standard would be invoked by reformers throughout Chinese history when criticizing contemporary shortcomings and proposing alternatives.

The concept of Datong particularly captured the imagination of later thinkers as a vision of what society could become. While Modest Prosperity represented the best achievable outcome under current conditions, Great Unity remained the ultimate aspiration—a north star guiding social and political development. This tension between ideal and achievable would characterize much of Chinese political philosophy.

These concepts also influenced practical governance through their emphasis on meritocracy. The Datong ideal of selecting leaders based on ability and virtue rather than birth provided philosophical foundation for the imperial examination system that would later develop. Similarly, the welfare provisions described in the Datong era inspired various social support systems implemented by different dynasties.

The emphasis on ritual as the foundation of social order shaped Chinese cultural practices for centuries. The detailed attention to proper conduct in various social situations, from ceremonies to everyday interactions, reflected the Confucian belief that these practices maintained the fabric of civilization itself. This ritual consciousness became characteristic of Chinese culture more broadly.

Legacy and Modern Relevance

The influence of these concepts extends far beyond their original historical context. In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, reformers like Kang Youwei reinterpreted the Datong ideal as a native Chinese vision of socialism or communism that could accommodate modernization while maintaining cultural authenticity. Kang’s Book of Great Unity imagined a future world of perfect equality and harmony inspired by these classical concepts.

Sun Yat-sen, founding father of modern China, frequently invoked these ideals in his political philosophy. His Three Principles of the People—especially the principle of Mínshēng —drew inspiration from the social welfare aspects of the Datong concept. The vision of a society where everyone’s needs were met resonated with modern reformist and revolutionary movements.

In contemporary China, the term Xiaokang has been revived to describe development goals. The government’s aim to build a “moderately prosperous society” by specific target dates consciously echoes this classical concept, adapting an ancient ideal to modern development planning. This usage demonstrates the continuing power of these philosophical concepts to shape political discourse.

The Datong ideal also continues to influence Chinese foreign policy concepts like “a community with a shared future for mankind,” which echoes the classical vision of universal harmony and shared benefit. The persistence of these themes across millennia demonstrates their enduring appeal and adaptability to changing circumstances.

Beyond China, these concepts have attracted international interest as early contributions to political philosophy. The vision of a society based on communal benefit rather than private accumulation offers alternative perspectives to dominant Western models. The emphasis on social harmony and care for vulnerable members presents values that remain relevant in contemporary discussions about social organization.

Conclusion: Enduring Visions of Social Order

The philosophical framework presented in the Liyun chapter represents one of humanity’s most enduring attempts to conceptualize ideal social organization. The distinction between Great Unity and Modest Prosperity establishes a spectrum against which societies can be measured, from perfect communal harmony to the best order achievable within imperfect conditions. This dual vision has provided both inspiration for transformation and guidance for practical governance across centuries of Chinese history.

The continued relevance of these concepts demonstrates their profound insight into perennial questions of social organization: How should resources be distributed? How should leaders be selected? How should society care for its vulnerable members? How can harmony be maintained among people with competing interests? The answers offered in this classical text continue to resonate because they address fundamental human concerns that transcend specific historical circumstances.

As contemporary societies grapple with issues of inequality, political legitimacy, and social cohesion, these ancient concepts offer valuable perspectives. The vision of a society where people’s needs are met, where leadership is based on merit rather than birth, and where community takes precedence over individual accumulation remains as compelling today as it was two millennia ago. The enduring power of these ideas lies in their ability to inspire both practical improvement and visionary transformation, guiding humanity toward better ways of living together.