This is very much the influence of Confucianism, or the subtle historic movement back in the days of 1000-700BCE that gave birth to Scholar-Officials at first place. Confucius or "儒生"'s "儒" was originally referring to clergy-scholar type of officials, which were servants to feudal lords that with-holding the knowledge of how mythical rites and rituals should be performed back in Zhou Dynasty (儒，术士之称) (四曰儒，以道得民).
However, as society evolves, the clergy part of "儒"'s duties become less and less important to the political and scholar part of their duties. While Zhou Dynasty in itself. tends to down-play the mythical part of their nobles' divine right to avoid the empowerment of priest class, merging priest duties to duties of their servant and nobilities. Confucius himself admire this strategy in governance. Confucianism, as a result, associate their moral codes, virtue and text with the interactions among mortal men/women.
After ancient Zhou system of governance collapsed in the reforms made by various warring state around 300 BCE, new society and political hierarchy emerged. Officials are ranked and focused on no more the "clans'" business, but the "state's" business.
To a great extent, religions are just ideologies with mythical factor, political organization and rituals.
True, since governance and other art of politics, philosophy and sociology were rationalized to have little to none mythological factor way before the form of imperial China.
Pragmatic rationale （实用理性） would be a better reason for that, which means that Chinese adaptation of different religions are based on whether their values and policies have physical value rather than spiritual guidance.
Overall, my opinion is that you either have a single Confucianism as a state-religion to represent its absolutely dominating role in political life of Imperial Chinese society + a Syncretism mechanic let you pick a secondary, or you have a separation of belief between "士绅" (scholar-official + rural gentlemen) and the others. Otherwise you end up in a lazy and 1 dimensional western portrait of "Oriental China". A society which spiritual world (at least) is all nice and harmonic, with no difference in people in faith.
But wait, why peasants there singing "Heil White Lotus" then go rebel pump themselves to my standing army? What's Four Buddhist Persecutions in China (三武灭佛)? Am I dying because I scold my dad and the law forbids that? What's defining those laws anyway? Not Buddhism I believe....
More formal answer, to some extent, on why I think you should have Confucianism as primary:
Confucianism Relationship with Buddhism and Daoism
Coexistence and Hierarchy: Buddhism and Daoism entered the Chinese cultural sphere (beginning in the Han and flourishing in later dynasties) and attracted widespread followings. However, rather than displacing Confucianism, these religions were typically accommodated
under a Confucian umbrella. The traditional formulation was
“Three Teachings” (三教) – referring to Confucianism (儒), Buddhism (释), and Daoism (道) – which were seen as three avenues of wisdom. The
balance of the Three Teachings, however, was not equal in the public realm. Confucianism generally claimed
primacy in state and social ethics, with Buddhism and Daoism occupying more specialized spiritual or metaphysical roles. A famous dictum described the ideal as
“Confucianism for outward social life, Daoism or Buddhism for inner cultivation”, a phenomenon dubbed “Confucian exterior, Daoist/Buddhist interior” (儒表道里 / 儒表佛里) by the scholars. In practice, this meant a Chinese scholar-official might
practice Confucian duties by day (governing according to Confucian norms) while
pursuing Buddhist meditation or Daoist longevity practices in private. The
outer layer of society – government, family rites, education – was Confucian, whereas personal faith and cosmology could draw from Buddhism/Daoism. This layering ensured Confucianism’s
dominance in the visible socio-political structure, even as individuals found spiritual fulfillment in other teachings.
State Attitudes and Integration: The imperial state largely tolerated Buddhism and Daoism as long as they did not challenge imperial authority or social order. In fact,
Confucian officials often took a syncretic view, seeing value in Buddhist and Daoist teachings but insisting on Confucian-guided governance. As the
Confucian historian
Ban Gu wrote in the
Han era,
“the Daoist and the Confucian both serve the sovereign”, implying each had its place under Heaven’s order. The government regulated Buddhism and Daoism (for example, through monastic registration or occasional suppression of heterodox sects), but
did not seek to eradicate them outright, consistent with the Confucian principle of
“inclusiveness and blending” (兼容并蓄). Confucianism itself teaches
respect for spiritual beings but distance from superstition –
“Respect the ghosts and spirits, but keep them at a distance” (敬鬼神而远之), as
Confucius is quoted in the
Analects. Accordingly,
excessively fervent or disorderly religious practices were labeled “improper worship” (淫祀) and were banned by the state, but normative Buddhist and Daoist worship was generally allowed, even patronized at times, so long as
Confucian civil order remained intact. This arrangement led to what sociologists call
“functional differentiation” among the Three Teachings:
Confucianism defined the public ethical code,
Buddhism offered salvation and metaphysics, and
Daoism provided ritual magic and cosmology (
fddi.fudan.edu.cn). Each tradition influenced the others (e.g. Neo-Confucianism in Song dynasty absorbed Buddhist/Daoist concepts in its metaphysics), yet
the state’s identity and ceremonies stayed fundamentally Confucian.
Korea, Japan, and Vietnam: A similar pattern unfolded in other East Asian cultures within the Confucian cultural sphere. In
Korea’s Joseon Dynasty, for instance,
Neo-Confucianism was adopted as state ideology and Buddhism was actively suppressed from politics (though it survived among commoners). In
Tokugawa Japan, Neo-Confucian ethics underpinned governance, even as Shinto and Buddhist practices coexisted.
Vietnam’s imperial court also elevated Confucian literati and rites to official status. In all these cases, Confucianism acted as the
unifying moral-political doctrine, while Buddhism, Daoism (or Shinto) catered to personal and communal religiosity. This
East Asian model of “Confucian civil religion” contrasts with the Western pattern of a dominant church; instead of one institutional church, Confucianism provided
an ethical-religious canopy under which plural worship traditions coexisted.
Folk Religion and Syncretism
Local Cults under a Confucian Canopy: At the local level, Chinese communities practiced a rich variety of
folk religions – worshipping ancestors, local deities, and performing seasonal festivals. These practices often blended Buddhist and Daoist elements (temple rites, cosmology) with Confucian elements (ancestor veneration, filial piety). Importantly,
Confucianism shaped the normative framework for acceptable local worship. The lineage rituals in ancestral halls, village etiquette, and family ceremonies were guided by Confucian
ancestral rites (祀典).
Clan lineages built ancestral shrines and compiled genealogies as prescribed by Confucian norms, effectively making
ancestral worship a universal “religious” duty of Chinese families. This aspect of Confucianism functioned as
the religion of the household and community, even for people who also prayed at Buddhist temples or Daoist shrines. A modern observer noted on Zhihu that
“it is precisely because Confucianism dominated China’s sacrificial rites that it acquired religious characteristics”. In this sense, Confucianism became
“the common people’s religion and the state’s religion”, providing a shared ritual language across society.
Religious Syncretism in Practice: The ordinary Chinese person in late imperial times did not strictly identify as “Confucian” or “Buddhist” in an exclusive way. Instead, people tended to
draw from all Three Teachings as needed – a phenomenon sometimes called
“religious syncretism” or
sanjiao heyi. For example, a villager might
adhere to Confucian family ethics and life-cycle rites,
worship at a Daoist temple for a local deity, and
invite Buddhist monks to perform funerals to ensure a favorable rebirth for the deceased.
Matteo Ricci, the 17th-century Jesuit, famously described the Chinese as having “Three Sects” that were not mutually exclusive religions, noting that these did not fight “to the death” as in Europe’s sectarian conflicts Instead,
the Three Teachings were intertwined in daily life:
“In many fundamental forms they were similar”, sharing concepts like Heaven, virtue, and the soul (
fddi.fudan.edu.cn). This high degree of syncretism is why modern Chinese often say
“we have no religion” in the Western sense – traditional Chinese religiosity was diffuse and blended.
However, even amid syncretism, Confucianism often played the
leading role in integrative schemes. Popular religious movements sometimes explicitly
combined the Three Teachings into one sect – for instance, the late Ming era saw the rise of the
Three Teachings Harmonious as One movement. Groups like the
“Three-One Teachings” (三一教) in Fujian or the
“Three Teachings Hall” (三教堂) in Henan taught that Confucius, Laozi, and Buddha should be venerated together as
equally sacred. These syncretic sects worshipped a merged pantheon and sought to erase boundaries between religions. Yet, it is telling that even these movements included Confucius among their highest deities and often couched their moral teachings in Confucian terms. The inclusion of Confucius alongside the Buddha indicates that
Confucian ethical authority remained indispensable. Likewise, many household altars in China would feature images or plaques of
“Heaven” (天) or Confucius (as Ultimate Sage) next to Buddhist or folk gods – symbolizing that
Confucian Heaven was the ultimate overseer. Anthropologists have noted that Chinese popular religion could be described as
Tianzuism (天祖教) – the worship of Heaven and ancestors – which is essentially the religious aspect of Confucianism. Thus, even the syncretic folk religion environment was grounded in
Confucian cosmology of Heaven-Family reciprocity.
Some critiques of the “Sanjiao as One”
The idea of
“Three Teachings as One” (三教合流) has been debated by scholars, with some arguing that it overstates the equality of the three traditions.
Critics point out that Confucianism never relinquished its primacy in the socio-political domain. E
ducated elites might have drawn on Buddhism or Daoism for personal cultivation, but their public identity and values were fundamentally Confucian. The civil service examinations, governing norms, and social mores all continued to be dictated by Confucian classics and doctrine, not by Buddhist sutras or Daoist texts.
Modern historians also caution that “Three Teachings as One” was more of an
intellectual slogan or ideal rather than a literal description of how the traditions functioned. It gained popularity in the late Ming (16th–17th centuries) when some literati and monks sought common ground between the teachings (
ccj.pku.edu.cn). However, even at this high point of syncretic discourse,
the Ming state still enforced Confucian propriety above all. As evidence, Ming law codes penalized heterodox sects, and emperors like
Hongwu and
Yongzheng issued edicts reaffirming Confucian values while curtailing Buddhist and Daoist clerical privileges. The rhetoric of unity often aimed to reduce sectarian strife, not to erase Confucian authority.
Chen Yinke offered a nuanced critique: he noted that while all three teachings coexisted and structurally mirrored each other in Chinese culture,
Confucianism’s role was unique in shaping institutions. Chen wrote,
“For the past two thousand years, the influence of Confucian teachings – the deepest and greatest – has been in the sphere of institutions, laws, and daily life, whereas in the realm of speculative thought, it was perhaps less than that of Buddhism or Daoism.” (《天师道与滨海地域之关系》) This suggests that
Buddhism and Daoism were highly influential in philosophy and personal spirituality, but Confucianism dominated the practical world of family, state, and society. Thus, even if in metaphysical discussions one might treat the three teachings as parallel, in
concrete social reality Confucian norms were “more equal than others.”
Finally, it is worth noting that the very notion of Confucianism (
Ruism or 儒教) as a “religion” has been debated. Some argue Confucianism is primarily a philosophy or
“civil ethic”, not a religion in the strict sense, because it lacks a priestly class and focuses on this-worldly ethics. However, many scholars (and an increasing number of Chinese intellectuals today) recognize
Confucianism’s religious dimensions: its reverence for Heaven and ancestors, its temples to Confucius, and its role in offering ultimate meaning and moral order. Confucianism can be, however,
“a different kind of religion” – one centered on social ritual and moral cultivation. Throughout history,
Confucianism did function as a religion by organizing communal life around sacred rites and moral law. This sui generis nature of Confucianism – a
“political religion” or
civil faith – meant that it could absorb and coexist with devotional religions like Buddhism, while still providing the
overarching identity of the civilization.
Conclusion
In summary, Confucianism served as the
dominant ideological and religious framework of East Asian societies (most explicitly in imperial China) by defining the state’s values, rituals, and social norms. Even as Buddhism, Daoism, and folk beliefs flourished among the populace, they did so in a milieu governed by
Confucian ethical ideals and ritual structures. The widespread syncretism of the Three Teachings should not obscure the fact that Confucianism was the
anchor of official culture – the curriculum for officials, the ceremony for emperors, and the etiquette for families. The
“Three Teachings as One” concept, while highlighting harmony, is better understood as an expression of compatibility under Confucian aegis rather than literal equality. As ancient and modern scholars have indicated,
Confucianism’s influence lay in ordering the human world – family hierarchy, social duties, political loyalty, and reverence for Heaven – which provided a foundation upon which other religious practices could comfortably rest (
fddi.fudan.edu.cn,
rujiazg.com). This Confucian bedrock shaped East Asian “religious naming conventions” and identities: people in East Asia historically did not need to choose one exclusive faith, because
Confucianism as a civil religion overrules multiple beliefs with a unifying moral cosmos.
