The Memory Palace Of Matteo Ricci

In Chapter 8 Spence breaks from the standard format of the previous chapters. Earlier chapters center on one image, alternating between an image in the memory palace (formed from an ideogram) and an image used to illustrate Cheng Dayue’s book. Each chapter opens with an image, which is used to introduce its themes. In Chapter 8, however, Spence uses one memory palace image and one illustration from Cheng Dayue’s book. In another break from the book’s earlier structure, the images are introduced at the end of the chapter rather than the beginning. The book ends with a short journey into Ricci’s memory palace.

The theme of cultural translation is significant in the final section. Particularly, the belief in China that the Christian God was a woman points to the complexity of translating theological beliefs. The way Mary was depicted in religious iconography seemed more God-like than human to Chinese observers. Combined with her prominence in Jesuit teachings, the belief emerged that Mary was the Christian God. Jesuits struggled to explain the immaculate conception of Christ, which complicated their attempts to explain Mary’s role in the Catholic faith. Ricci gifted a painting of Mary to the Chinese emperor, though the realism of the work disturbed him and he placed it in storage. Images of Mary were generally received with pious reverence, though images of the crucified Christ were not as well received. On one occasion, the eunuch who found Ricci’s cross “truly thought it was something evil” (246). Ricci struggled to describe the spiritual significance of the crucified Christ and Christ’s status as both human and divine. Because of this, images of the Virgin continued to circulate despite the confusion they caused about the Christian faith. Chinese converts began to make images of the Virgin, who also featured prominently in the dreams of converts.

The clash of worldviews shown in intellectual exchange and debate was significant. For example, Buddhists abstained from fish, meat, eggs, and dairy because they believe in the oneness of all beings and in the transmigration of souls. While Ricci observed this diet on fast days, he disagreed with the reasons behind fasting. For Ricci, fasting should be tied to penance, “to remind oneself of one’s state of sin” (250). The belief in the transmigration of souls, or reincarnation, was particularly troubling to Ricci, who believed that the high rate of infanticide among poor families was tied to the belief that the children would be reincarnated into a richer family. This is demonstrated in Ricci’s exchange with Yu Chunxi, who dismantled Ricci’s critique of Buddhism. As Spence notes,

Ricci replied at considerable length, explaining the nature of his mission, his use of Western science in pursuit of his ends, his conviction that Buddhism violated the very first of the Ten Commandments, and his feeling that it had not raised moral standards in China despite the two thousand years during which it had been preached (252).

While Ricci was proud of his response, Yu showed Ricci’s argument to his teacher Zhuhong, a leading intellectual. Zhuhong said that Ricci’s letter did not warrant a response since his argumentation was so shallow. In another instance, Ricci engaged in heated debate with the Buddhist monk Sanhuai over the meaning of creation and the role of the human mind in creation. Other scholars were impressed with Ricci’s intelligence, including the esteemed intellectual Li Zhi. Overall, however, Ricci was often “depressed at the ‘coldness’ of the local Chinese toward both himself and his religion” (260).

Ricci had complex opinions about China. For example, there were many enslaved Chinese people in Macao. Ricci blamed the Chinese temperament for their enslavement, noting “their combination of lust and timorousness” (209). He described China as a “country full of slaves” (219), which he attributed to the lust of men. In his sharp critique of what he saw as excessive lust, Ricci echoed the general discussion in the period. The church strongly condemned any sexual practices that did not result in procreation. The perceived tolerance of homosexuality in Islam, for example, was roundly condemned by Catholic theologians.

At other moments, Ricci was impressed by Chinese scholarly accomplishments, China’s agricultural practices, and the country’s size and diversity. Ricci felt that the Chinese were strong targets for conversion, noting the compatibility of Confucianism with many Catholic beliefs and the sophisticated bureaucracy of the country. Yet he criticized the monks he observed in a Buddhist temple complex outside Shaozhou as living “in a truly dissolute way, and not only do many of them have wives and children, which is forbidden by their monastic rule, they are also robbers, and killers of those who pass along the road” (211). Ricci felt that Chinese society had regressed from a noble state of piety into a period of greed and dishonesty. He singled out the emperor as being out of touch from his subjects, locked away in his palace and afraid of the outside world. Ricci desired to convert the emperor but could never gain an audience with him. Ricci’s contradictory feelings about China were never resolved, and tension between admiration and condemnation thrums in his writing.