Philosophy	East	&	West	Volume	68,	Number	4	October	2018 ©	2018	by	University	of	Hawai'i	Press 1 BOOK	REVIEW Gottfried	Wilhelm	Leibniz,	Briefe	über	China	(1694-1716):	Die	Korrespondenz	mit Barthélemy	Des	Bosses	S.J.	und	anderen	Mitgliedern	des	Ordens.	Edited	by	Rita Widmaier	and	Malte-Ludolf	Babin.	Hamburg:	Meiner,	2017.	Pp.	660.	Hardback EUR	148.00,	ISBN	978-3-7873-3102-4. Reviewed	by	Eric	S.	Nelson The	Hong	Kong	University	of	Science	and	Technology hmericsn@ust.hk 1.	Introduction Rita	Widmaier	and	Malte-Ludolf	Babin	have	done	a	valuable	scholarly	service	for studies of the early	modern European reception of China in collecting letters from	Leibniz's	extensive	correspondence	concerning	China	and	translating	them from the original Latin and French into German. This multi-lingual and chronologically	organized	edition	gathers letters	to	and	from	Leibniz	as	well	as supplementary texts composed between the years 1694 and 1716. It incorporates helpful clarificatory notes as well as an informative and lucid introduction. This edition focuses on the exchanges between Leibniz and the Jesuit theologian	and	philosopher	Barthélemy	Des	Bosses	S.J. (1668-1738)	and	other Jesuits in Europe	who	were in contact	with their colleagues in Asia.1 Leibniz's two	primary	interlocutors	in	this	volume	are	Des	Bosses	(selections	from	fortyseven documents are included) and the Bavarian Jesuit philosopher and theologian	Ferdinand	Orban	S.J.	(1655-1732)	(twenty-seven	letters).	Des	Bosses and Orban function as significant figures in the European transmission of information	about	China.	Leibniz's	less	frequent	direct	correspondents	included here	are	Theobald	Isensehe	S.J.,	Giovanni	Battista	Tolomei	S.J.,	and	René-Joseph de	Tournemine	S.J. This volume should be considered a second in a series. It expands on Rita	Widmaier's previous 2006 volume of Leibniz's correspondence regarding China,	Der Briefwechsel mit den Jesuiten in China (1689-1714), that primarily concerns the period until 1707.2 It testifies to the continuing importance of China in Leibniz's thought that in this new volume only the first nine letters were composed prior to 1708. The subsequent ninety-nine documents are dated	between	1708	and,	the	year	of	Leibniz's	death,	1716.	These	two	volumes together provide the core of Leibniz's exchanges concerning Chinese philosophy, politics, religion, science, technology as well as reports on and controversies	over	Christian	missionary	activities in	China.	They	are	not	limited to letters to and from Leibniz. There are, in addition, useful supplementary Philosophy	East	&	West	Volume	68,	Number	4	October	2018 ©	2018	by	University	of	Hawai'i	Press 2 materials such as missionary reports and reports on the Chinese rites controversy that were discussed in the original correspondence. Copies of letters and reports from China as well as Leibniz's own writings about China were circulated among European intellectual networks through which the development	of	the	early	modern	European	reception	of	China	can	be	traced. It is challenging to encapsulate the entire correspondence in a book review.	This	review	will	consequently	outline	a	few	of	its	major	threads. 2.	Leibniz	and	Intercultural	Philosophy There	is	an	on-going	intensification	of	interest	in	non-Western	philosophy	in	the West and an intercultural turn in how-at least some-philosophers are practicing	philosophy.	There is furthermore	a	reevaluation	of	ethnocentric	and anti-ethnocentric	tendencies	within	the	history	of	modern	Western	philosophy that	offers an	alternative	understanding	of its	movements	and figures. Leibniz has	been	seen	as	a	crucial	figure	in	this	history	not	only	due	to	his	prestige	as	a philosopher and his evident enthusiasm for China but due to his sustained endeavors during the last decades of his life to sincerely engage with and interpret	Chinese	discourses	and	practices.	The	extent	of	Leibniz's interest	and engagement	is	remarkable	given	that	he	never	left	Europe	and	did	not	know	the Chinese language: one thread in the correspondence concerns his efforts to figure	out	the	titles	and	contents	of	sixteen	Chinese	books	that	Joachim	Bouvet (1656-1730),	his earlier and	most significant interlocutor in	China,	had sent to him.3 Leibniz articulated the need for an "exchange of light" between Europe and	China. Leibniz's efforts in this regard	might appear to offer an exemplary instance	of	East-West	philosophical	interaction	given	the	subsequent	history	of indifference and outright hostility that characterizes modern Western philosophy's	relations	with	non-Western	intellectual	discourses. There	are,	however,	difficulties,	and	two	potential	conflicting	extremes in interpreting Leibniz's discourse on China: one extreme would be to overly idealize this engagement according to recent aspirations and norms. The correspondence	discloses	how	noteworthy	Leibniz's	engagement	is	as	well	as	its limitations and problems. Despite the openness and tolerance of Leibniz's interpretive	practice,	it	would	be	anachronistic	to	construe	Leibniz's	reflections on China from the perspective of contemporary secular	multiculturalism. The other	extreme	would	be	to	deny	that	it	is	a	genuine	encounter	at	all,	pointing	to Leibniz's reliance on the Christian missionary context that informs his correspondence and writings, and what has been argued is a proto-capitalist and proto-colonial model of exchange between East and West.4 The former point	would	place	Leibniz's	uses	of	Christianity	in	question	and	the	latter	would emphasize the practical interests evident in his attention to learning Chinese techniques	and	technologies.	This	practical interest is	manifest throughout	the correspondence. A list of fifty practical and technical questions for Leibniz on how Europe could gain useful practices and technologies from China, Philosophy	East	&	West	Volume	68,	Number	4	October	2018 ©	2018	by	University	of	Hawai'i	Press 3 encompassing	Chinese	practical	knowledge	of	medicine,	chemistry,	production, and	trade,	is	included	as	an	appendix.5	In	addition,	there	is	the	anxiety	reflected in	a	number	of	letters	concerning	the	rites	controversy	that	the	Chinese	will	find nothing of value in exchange with Europe and, if Jesuit strategies of accommodation	are	forsaken,	China	would	exclude	Europeans.	As	a	result,	they would	have	accessed	European	science	and	technology	without	Europe	gaining access	to	Chinese	science	and	technology. Leibniz's	correspondence	reveals	a	more	complex	picture.	First,	Leibniz interprets	Christianity	as	natural	theology	and	as	the	ethics	of	charity,	which	as "natural"	the	Chinese	have	more	greatly	perfected	than	the	Europeans.	Second, his interest in	exchange	between	Europe	and	China	and learning	from	Chinese morality	and	practical	knowledge,	and	the	anxiety	about losing this	possibility, indicate	how	Europe	is	not	yet	asymmetrically	positioned	above	China	as	would increasingly	be	done in	Western	discourses. Indeed,	Leibniz	advocated inviting Chinese	missionaries	to	Europe	to	teach	practical	philosophy	and	hiring	Chinese intellectuals to open schools in Europe to teach Chinese language and intellectual culture. If	we	compare	Leibniz's	discussions	of	China	with those	of Kant	or	Hegel	a	century later, it is	clear	that	the	European	perception	of	China had	been	radically	altered	for	the	worse.	Reason	and	philosophy	are	exclusively part	of the	history	of the	West	as	Chinese	civilization is judged	to	be	primitive and	inferior. 3.	Leibniz's	Interpretation	of	China Leibniz published the	Novissima Sinica (The Latest from	China) in 1697. It is a collection of documents from Christian missionaries in China with his own preface that praised Chinese moral and political thought, practice, and institutions (pp. 3-35). Leibniz recurrently expresses admiration for a great empire	at	the	other	end	of	the	Euro-Asian	continent	that	is	superior	to	Europe in a number of ways, including ethical-political organization, pedagogy for ethical-political life,	natural theology,	and	practical	philosophy.6	Chinese forms of life and thought indicate models from which Europeans should learn and adopt in	order to improve	and	reform	their	practices	and institutions.	China is not	deemed	an	inferior	land	to	be	exploited	and	dominated	by	the	West	and	its intellectual traditions are	not categorized	as	merely	proto-philosophical in the writings	and	correspondence	of	Leibniz.	China	surpasses	Europe	in	a	number	of areas	(natural	theology,	practical	philosophy,	and	the	organization	of	moral	and political life) just	as	Europe	surpasses	China in	other	areas (revealed theology, theoretical	philosophy,	and	mathematics	and	science). Leibniz	identifies	in	particular	the	legendary	cultural	hero	Emperor	Fuxi 伏羲 and Confucius (Kongzi	孔子) as the founders of philosophy in China. He attributed to Fuxi a	mathematical	wisdom	because	of his association	with the development of the trigrams (gua	卦) of the	Classic of Changes (Yijing	易經). Leibniz went beyond Bouvet and figurist speculations about the Yijing. He Philosophy	East	&	West	Volume	68,	Number	4	October	2018 ©	2018	by	University	of	Hawai'i	Press 4 contends in letters from 1703 and 1705 (pp. 48-61), and in his remarks from August	1709	(pp.	120-123),	that	the	Yijing's	broken	and	unbroken	lines	indicate a binary mathematics of 0 and 1. In addition to its theoretical mathematical nature,	it	also	expresses	a	monotheistic	natural	theology	as	the	broken	(-	-)	and unbroken (-) lines represent the nothing (0), God (1), and their combination the	creation	of	the	myriad	things	out	of	nothingness.	The	three	great	law-givers (Legislatores) recognized by the Chinese are Confucius, Fo (the Buddha), and Laozi (pp. 112-113).	Of these three, he	only addresses Confucian teachings as promoting a high noble ethics and a natural theology that parallel ancient Hebrew	religious	and	Greco-Roman	philosophical	teachings	(pp.	116-119). Natural theology is religious truth	demonstrated	by the	natural use	of reason	in	contrast	to	revealed	theology	based	on	scripture	and	faith. It	plays	a crucial role in Leibniz's ethics and his efforts at reconciling divergent and opposing teachings, allowing him to simultaneously liberalize Christianity, separating its fundamental ethics of charity from a determinate form of revealed faith with specific religious practices, and recognize truth in other Western	and	non-Western	forms	of	religious	and	philosophical	discourse.	It	is	in this sense of natural theology that he claims the following two points: the ancient	Chinese	are	closer	to	the	truth	than	the	ancient	Greeks	(pp.	372-373),	a statement that presupposes his projective interpretation of creation from nothing in Fuxi; and the Chinese practice the highest ethical teachings of Christianity	and	are	more	Christian	than	Christian	Europe	in	the	Novissima	(pp. 6-7) and his unfinished late work Discourse on the Natural Theology of the Chinese	(Discours	sur	la	théologie	naturelle	des	Chinois,	1715-1716).7 Leibniz did not carefully distinguish between ancient Confucian and Neo-Confucian philosophies, construing the supreme ultimate (taiji 太極), patterning	principle	(li	理),	and	material	force	(qi	氣)	as	fundamental	Confucian notions	of	great	antiquity	that	signify-in	his	Platonic	Trinitarian interpretation adopted from the Jesuit missionary Nicolò Longobardo (1559-1654)-the original potency,	wisdom, and	will/love. The	Chinese engaged in philosophical reasoning	about	nature	and	ethics	although	not in	a fixed	systematic	scientific form (pp. 118-119). Leibniz's interpretation of neo-Confucian metaphysics would be more systematically developed in the Discourse on the Natural Theology	of	the	Chinese. The	concept	of	the	scientific	systematic	nature	of	philosophy	would	be employed by the time of Kant and Hegel to exclude non-Western intellectual discourses	from	philosophy.	It	is	not	yet	the	case	that	the	West	is	identified	with modernity	in	a	way	that	separates	it	from	the	other	cultures	of	the	world.	Nor	is it conceived at this point as a one-way street in which the West exclusively developed	it	and	imposed	it	on	the	world.	Returning	to	Leibniz	challenges	such interpretations. China offers for Leibniz (as for other early Enlightenment thinkers such as Christian	Wolff, the French physiocrats, and	Voltaire)	models for furthering European Enlightenment and accordingly modernization, if we Philosophy	East	&	West	Volume	68,	Number	4	October	2018 ©	2018	by	University	of	Hawai'i	Press 5 adopt	the	idea	that	there	is	an	inherent	connection	between	Enlightenment	and modernity.8 4.	Leibniz	and	the	Chinese	Rites	Controversy Leibniz's	correspondence	with	the	Jesuits	occurs	within	the	context	of	what	was perceived	as the	greatest	Christian	mission since the time	of the	apostles and the so-called "Chinese Rites Controversy" between the Jesuits	who upheld an "accommodationist" strategy between Christianity and Chinese culture and other	missionary	orders	who	opposed	adapting	Christianity	to	the	Chinese	way of life that they considered pagan and barbaric.9 The principal areas of contention centered on questions of whether: (1) converted Chinese could continue to practice honoring their ancestors or if this was a form of superstitious pagan worship, (2) the cult of Confucius was a religious or civil one,	and	(3)	Chinese	expressions	such	as	Shangdi	上帝 (God	on	high)	and	tian 天 (heaven) were adequate to express the monotheistic Judeo-Christian conception	of	God. The	correspondence	centers	on	the	challenges	to	and	prohibition	of	the Jesuit position of accommodation by Pope Clement XI, a prohibition that	was only	lifted	by	the	Roman	Catholic	Church	in	1939.	Important	supplemental	texts are included that were discussed by Leibniz and his interlocutors: (1) a document	clarifying	Pope	Clement	XI's	decree	against the	Chinese rites	on	20. November	1704	that	was	forwarded	to	the	Chinese	mission	(pp.	88-89),	(2)	the responding	proclamation	of	the	Kangxi	Emperor	(康熙,	1654-1722)	that	banned Christian	missionary	activities	in	China	(pp.	128-131),	(3)	the	papal	decree	issued by Pope Clement XI on 25. September 1710 that forbade the practice and toleration	of the	"Chinese	rites"	as	well	as forbidding further	discussion	of the issue	(pp.	190-197). Leibniz intervened as an advocate of tolerance and the principle of charity in these disputed questions throughout his correspondence and in writings such as "Circa Sinensium cultum religionemque" ("On the Cult and Religion	of	the	Chinese")	(pp.	110-123),	an	essay	from	August	1709	shared	with Des	Bosses,	and	later	in	the	Discourse	on	the	Natural	Theology	of	the	Chinese.10 Leibniz,	relying	on	Jesuit	and	their	Neo-Confucian	sources,	could	argue: (1) honoring one's ancestors was understood in Confucianism as ethically formative rather than a superstitious worship of spirits involving rewards; (2) the	cult	of	Confucius	was	primarily	a	civil	and	philosophical	one	aimed	at	moral education;	and	(3)	different	uses	of	words	such	as	Shangdi	and	tian	need	to	be distinguished,	just	as	this	is	the	case	in	Europe	where	heaven	can	refer	to	either the	physical	sky	or	the	divine.	There	was	nothing	intrinsically	wrong	in	Chinese ethics and religion that could not be brought in accord	with true Christianity, which is in essence the practice of justice as "the charity of the	wise, that is, universal benevolence" (iustitia est caritas sapientis seu benevolentia universalis).11 Philosophy	East	&	West	Volume	68,	Number	4	October	2018 ©	2018	by	University	of	Hawai'i	Press 6 5.	Conclusion Contemporary	readers	can	engage	Widmaier's	and	Babin's	edition	of	Briefe	über China (1694-1716) in a number of ways. Leibniz's interpretation of China is a significant	example	and	test	case	for	his	hermeneutics,	ethics,	and	philosophy	of religion.	It	is	also	a	noteworthy	historical	exemplar	of	East-West	philosophizing. It	is	also	of	interest	to	trace	the	early	modern	transfer	of	knowledge	from	China and	the	formation	of	imaginaries	of	China	and	the	Orient	in	the	Western	mind. In	Leibniz's	correspondence,	we	can	recognize	the	historical	limitations of Leibniz's understanding of the Chinese	world as	well as how extraordinary this	episode	in	the	entangled	history	of	East-West	intellectual	history	continues to be as an attempt of a philosopher to grasp with curiosity and openmindedness	a	distant	and	unfamiliar	philosophical	culture. 1	The	correspondence	between	Leibniz	and	Des	Bosses	is	available	in	English translation	in	Gottfried	Wilhelm	Leibniz,	The	Leibniz-Des	Bosses	Correspondence (New	Haven:	Yale	University	Press,	2007). 2	Rita	Widmaier,	Der	Briefwechsel	mit	den	Jesuiten	in	China	(1689-1714) (Hamburg:	Meiner,	2006). 3	Leibniz	to	Des	Bosses,	4.	August	1710,	pp.	184-185. 4	A	Marxist	critique	of	Leibniz	along	such	lines	can	be	found	in	Jon	Elster, Leibniz	et	la	formation	de	l'esprit	capitaliste	(Paris:	AubierMontaigne,	1975. 5	See	Heinrich	Christian	Kortholt	für	Leibniz:	Fünfzig	Fragen	und	Hinweise,	wie Europa	aus	Asien	Nutzen	ziehen	kann	(Heinrich	Christian	Kortholt	for	Leibniz: fifty	questions	and	indications	on	how	Europe	can	benefit	from	Asia),	pp.	398409. 6	For	an	overview	and	analysis	of	Leibniz's	interpretation	of	China,	see	Franklin Perkins,	Leibniz	and	China:	A	Commerce	of	Light	(Cambridge:	Cambridge University	Press,	2004) 7	Available	in	English	in	Gottfried	Wilhelm	Leibniz,	Writings	on	China	(Chicago: Open	Court,	1994). 8	On	Leibniz	and	the	Enlightenment	debate	over	China,	see	Simon	Kow,	China in	Early	Enlightenment	Political	Thought	(Abingdon:	Routledge,	2017);	Eric	S. Nelson,	"Leibniz	and	China:	Religion,	Hermeneutics,	and	Enlightenment," Religion	in	the	Age	of	Enlightenment	(RAE)	1	(2009):	277-300;	Dawid	Rogacz, "The	Birth	of	Enlightenment	Secularism	from	the	Spirit	of	Confucianism,"	Asian Philosophy	28,1	(2018):	68-83. 9	See	"Vorrede	zu	den	Novissima	Sinica	[1697/99),"	pp.	34-35.	On	the	Jesuits	in China	and	the	Chinese	Rites	Controversy,	see	David	E.	Mungello,	Curious	Land: Jesuit	Accommodation	and	the	Origins	of	Sinology	(Honolulu:	University	of Hawaii	Press,	1989) 10	Both	texts	are	available	in	English	in	Leibniz,	Writings	on	China. Philosophy	East	&	West	Volume	68,	Number	4	October	2018 ©	2018	by	University	of	Hawai'i	Press 7 11	Gottfried	Wilhelm	Leibniz,	Political	Writings,	edited	by	Patrick	Riley (Cambridge:	Cambridge	University	Press,	1998),	p.	164.	Compare	Leibniz, Writings	on	China,	p.	104.