{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_46389/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_46389","id":"gutenberg_46389","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/46389","summary":null,"tags":["Category: Philosophy & Ethics","Category: Religion/Spirituality","Ethics -- China","Philosophy, Chinese"],"text":"THE SAYINGS OF CONFUCIUS\n\nA NEW TRANSLATION OF THE GREATER\n\nPART OF THE CONFUCIAN ANALECTS\n\n\nWITH INTRODUCTION AND NOTES\n\n\n\nLIONEL GILES, M.A. (Oxon.)\n\n\nASSISTANT IN THE DEPARTMENT OF ORIENTAL BOOKS\n\nAND MANUSCRIPTS OF THE BRITISH MUSEUM\n\n\n\nTHE WISDOM OF THE EAST SERIES\n\nEdited by\n\nL. CRANMER-BYNG\n\nDr. S. A. KAPADIA.\n\n\n\n\n\nNEW YORK\n\nE. P. DUTTON AND COMPANY\n\n1910\n\n\n\n\nCONTENTS\n\nINTRODUCTION\nLIST OF THE PRINCIPAL DISCIPLES\nGOVERNMENT AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS\nINDIVIDUAL VIRTUE\nCONFUCIUS' ESTIMATE OF OTHERS\nCONFUCIUS ON HIMSELF\nMISCELLANEOUS SAYINGS\nPERSONALIA\nCONFUCIUS AS SEEN BY OTHERS\nSAYINGS OF THE DISCIPLES\n\n\n\n\nEDITORIAL NOTE\n\n\nThe object of the Editors of this series is a very definite one.\nThey desire above all things that, in their humble way, these books\nshall be the ambassadors of goodwill and understanding between East\nand West--the old world of Thought and the new of Action. In this\nendeavour, and in their own sphere, they are but followers of the\nhighest example in the land. They are confident that a deeper knowledge\nof the great ideals and lofty philosophy of Oriental thought may help\nto a revival of that true spirit of Charity which neither despises nor\nfears the nations of another creed and colour. Finally, in thanking\npress and public for the very cordial reception given to the \"Wisdom of\nthe East\" Series, they wish to state that no pains have been spared to\nsecure the best specialists for the treatment of the various subjects\nat hand.\n\nL. CRANMER-BYNG.\nS. A. KAPADIA.\n\nNORTHBROOK SOCIETY,\n185, PICCADILLY, W.\n\n\n\n\nINTRODUCTION\n\n\nConfucius is one of the few supremely great figures in the world's\nhistory. A man's greatness must always be measured, in the first\nplace, by the consensus of opinion in his own country; the judgment of\nforeigners can only be allowed to have a secondary value. Especially\nis this true when the critics are not only foreigners, but belong to a\ntotally different order of civilisation from the men whose greatness\nthey would appraise. For even if they can keep their minds free from\npurely national bias of the unreasoning sort, they will naturally look\nfor such attributes as are highly prized among themselves, and feel\ndisappointed if these are not much in evidence. They will be apt to see\ncertain defects too plainly, whereas they may easily overlook or fail\nto appreciate to the full those very qualities on which the title to\ngreatness is mainly based. These errors and prejudices will, doubtless,\ntend to disappear as more intimate knowledge is gained and the\nessential unity of human nature shows itself beneath the accidents of\ncustom and environment. But the process will always be slow. The name\nof Confucius may be deemed sufficiently familiar in the West to render\nunnecessary any revision of the popular verdict which has already been\npassed on him. But are his judges equally familiar with the teaching\nwhich his name represents? The name of Shakespeare was well enough\nknown to Frenchmen in the time of Voltaire. Yet how many generations\nhad to pass ere they began to recognise his true greatness? The\nparallel between dramatist and social reformer may seem strained, but\nit is not drawn at random. In both cases, wide differences of language\nand the inadequacy of translations to bridge the gap, lie at the root\nof the trouble.\n\nNo great man has suffered more than Confucius from the stupidity, the\nmisstatements and the misrepresentations, from the lack of sympathy\nand generosity, and, in some points, from the pure ignorance of his\ncritics. Early travellers arriving from the West, amongst a people\nutterly alien to themselves in almost every detail--language,\ndress, habits, modes of thought, ethical ideals and general view of\nlife--would have done well to walk very warily and, in the Confucian\nphrase, \"to reserve their judgment\" on what they saw and heard around\nthem. But patience and discrimination were the very last virtues\nwhich these inquisitive newcomers had a mind to practise; and,\nunluckily, the extraordinary fame of the national sage marked him out\nas one of the earliest victims to their thirst for the marvellous.\nOn the strength of Chinese evidence, readily forthcoming and eagerly\nswallowed, the most exaggerated accounts of this new luminary were\npoured into the ears of Europe, and it may well be imagined that these\nenthusiastic reports suffered no diminution in the telling. Confucius\nwas the prince of philosophers, the wisest and most consummate of\nsages, the loftiest moralist, the most subtle and penetrating intellect\nthat the world had ever seen. He was a statesman, a bard, an historian\nand an antiquary rolled into one. His sagacity put the most illustrious\nof ancient and modern philosophers to shame. He was the greatest and\nnoblest representative of the greatest, happiest, and most highly\ncivilised people on the face of the earth. Such extravagant eulogy\ncould only pave the way for disillusionment. When, after the lapse of\na hundred years or so, foreigners had painfully acquired sufficient\nknowledge of the language to enable them to begin translating, after\na fashion, parts of the Classics said to have been composed by this\nglorious sage, or at least containing the choicest pearls of his\nwisdom still extant, it is not altogether surprising that the results\ndid not come up to the general expectation. Reactionist in, and it\nsoon became the fashion to decry the once much-lauded philosopher.\nHis sayings, which had been extolled as the very epitome of wisdom,\nwere now voted jejune and commonplace. His teaching was found to be\nshallow, disjointed, unsatisfying. He was blamed for his materialistic\nbias, for his rigid formalism, for his poverty of ideas, for his lack\nof spiritual elevation. Comparisons, much in his disfavour, were\ndrawn between him and the founders of other world-systems of religion\nand ethics. All this before the circumstances of his career had been\nstudied, before the surface of contemporary Chinese history had been so\nmuch as scratched, before the host of native commentators and critics\nhad been consulted, or their existence even become known; above all,\nbefore the very book which contained his authentic sayings had been\ntranslated with anything approaching to exactness or understanding, or\nwith a faint realisation of its numerous difficulties and pit-falls.\n\nSuch was still the deplorable state of things when Legge set to work\non his translation of the Confucian Canon, which when completed many\nyears later, with its exhaustive prolegomena, notes and appendices,\nformed a truly wonderful monument of research and erudition. With\nits publication, Chinese scholarship was carried at once to a higher\nplane, and foreign study of Confucian doctrine began in earnest.\nThe heavy accumulations of ignorance and error were in large part\nremoved, and the figure of the great Teacher began at last to emerge\nfrom the \"obliterating sands of time.\" His sayings were no longer read\nas interesting but desultory fragments of conversation, but studied\nin relation to the events of his life. From various Chinese sources,\nthe chief of which were the Analects themselves and Ss\u016d-ma Ch\u2018ien's\nbiography, Legge managed to compile a good and coherent account of\nthe sage's life, work and wanderings, which was an enormous advance\non anything that had been done before, and is not likely, even in the\nfuture, to undergo any considerable addition or amendment. There are\nmany minor points which may be disputed, and many long blanks which\nmay never be filled up, but taken as a whole, the chronology and the\nleading events of the life of Confucius must now be considered as\nfinally settled.\n\nIf Legge is on firm ground where hard facts are concerned, it is far\notherwise when he comes to draw inferences from these facts, to sum up\nthe salient principles of Confucian ethics, and to pass judgment on the\ncharacter of Confucius himself. His pronouncements on these points,\ntoo hastily accepted as final, need to be carefully re-examined and,\nas I shall hope to show, largely modified if not totally reversed. His\nopinion, of course, was based chiefly on his own interpretation of the\nmore important sayings in the Analects, in translating which he had\nthe oral help of native scholars, besides the benefit of voluminous\nstandard commentaries. Thus equipped for his task, it cannot but appear\nstrange that he, admittedly a great sinologue, should have gone so\nfar astray as to miss the very core and essence of the doctrines to\nthe elucidation of which he devoted most of his life. The explanation\nmay lie in the fact that he was a Christian missionary in the first\nplace, and only secondly a scientific student; he had come to teach\nand convert the heathen, not to be taught or converted by them. This\npreconceived idea acted as a drag on the free use of his understanding,\nand prevented him from entering whole-heartedly into his subject. We\nare told that the Master himself had \"no foregone conclusions,\" but\nLegge's whole attitude to Confucianism bespoke one comprehensive and\nfatal foregone conclusion--the conviction that it must at every point\nprove inferior to Christianity. A certain inelasticity of mind showed\nitself also in the way in which he approached the work of translation.\nHe was too apt to look upon a Chinese word as something rigid and\nunchanging in its content, which might be uniformly rendered by a\nsingle English equivalent. Delicate shades of meaning he too often\nruthlessly ignored. Now there is a certain number of Chinese terms\nwhich mirror Chinese ideas, but have really no absolute equivalent\nin English at all, and must therefore be translated with the aid of\ncircumlocution, and in such a way as to suit the context and the\ngeneral spirit of the passage. It is in such terms, unfortunately,\nthat the very essence and inner significance of the Confucian teaching\nare contained. Obviously, if proper equivalents are not given, the\nwhole sense of the passages in which they occur will be lost or\nviolently distorted. Worse still, the judgments laboriously built up\non such rotten foundations will be hopelessly vitiated. Here, indeed,\nwe have an object-lesson of the importance, clearly recognised by\nConfucius himself, of \"defining terms\" and making \"words harmonise\nwith things.\" Indispensable as such a process is for any investigation\nin which language plays a part, it is doubly so when words have to be\ntransplanted, as it were, from their native soil to one differing from\nit in almost every conceivable quality. Such an operation can only be\nsuccessful if carried out with the utmost delicacy and care, and no\namount of erudition can supply the want of that instinctive feeling\nfor the right word which is the translator's choicest gift. The scope\nof the present work forbids my entering into details, but some broad\nexamples of failure in this respect will be noted later on.\n\nOf the life of Confucius only the barest sketch can be given here,\nbut stress may be laid on one or two points which it is important to\nbear in mind. Confucius was born at a time when the feudal system,\nestablished several centuries earlier by the founder of the Chou\ndynasty, was showing unmistakable signs of disruption and decay. It\nis almost certain that China had been feudally governed from the very\nearliest times, but Wu Wang placed the whole system on a seemingly\nfirmer basis than ever. He divided his realm into a large number of\nvassal states, which he bestowed upon his own kith and kin who had\nhelped him to the throne. Thus the Empire really came to resemble the\nhuge united family which Chinese political theorists declare it to be,\nand for a short time all seems to have worked smoothly. But as the\nbonds of kinship grew looser, the central government gradually lost\nall effective control over its unruly children, and the various states\nwere soon embroiled in perpetual feuds and struggles among themselves,\nbesides being usually at loggerheads with the parent dynasty. The state\nof things that ensued may be likened (though on a far larger scale) to\nseveral Wars of the Roses going on at the same time, or better still,\nto the turbulence of the later days of the Holy Roman Empire, when the\nfealty of its members had become merely nominal. Matters were further\ncomplicated in many of the states by the upgrowth of large and powerful\nfamilies which often attempted either by insidious methods or by open\nviolence to wrest the supreme authority into their own hands. Thus in\nLu, the comparatively small state to which Confucius belonged, there\nwere three such families, the Chi, the M\u00eang, and the Shu; the heads of\nthese clans, of whom we hear a good deal in the Analects, had already,\nby the time of Confucius, reduced their lawful prince (or duke, as\nhe is generally called) to a condition of virtual dependency. On the\nother hand, they themselves were sometimes threatened by the lawless\nbehaviour of their own officers, such as the ambitious chariot-driver,\nYang Huo,[1] who thought nothing of seizing towns or even the person\nof his own chief, in order to hold him to ransom. Thus, though the\nperiod of the \"Warring States\" is not usually reckoned as beginning\nuntil after the death of Confucius, the date is a purely arbitrary one,\ninasmuch as his whole life long disturbances were rife and military\noperations well-nigh incessant throughout the length and breadth of\nChina. In the midst of the prevailing disorder, Confucius comported\nhimself with an admirable mixture of dignity, tact and outspoken\ncourage. Wisely opposing the dangerous tendency to decentralisation,\nand upholding the supreme authority of the Emperor as against his too\npowerful vassals, he heartily disapproved of the illegal usurpations\nof the dukes, the great families and the soldiers of fortune that\npreyed one upon the other, and did not shrink on occasion from\nexpressing his disgust in unequivocal terms. But knowing the futility\nof protests unbacked by force, he kept himself aloof for the most\npart, and devoted himself to a long course of study and teaching,\ngathering, it is said, as many as three thousand disciples around him.\nThis is a palpable exaggeration, but there can be no doubt that he had\nbecome a marked man and gained great fame as a moralist and teacher\nmany years before he actually took office. In 501 B.C., at the age of\nfifty, he at last made his entry on the political stage by accepting\nthe governorship of a small town in Lu. Here he is said to have been\neminently successful in the work of reform, and he rapidly rose to be\nthe most trusted adviser of Duke Ting, who on one occasion at least\nowed his life to the courage and address of his minister. But it was\nnot long ere the weak and fickle character of the ruler, carefully\nmanipulated by rivals to Confucius, brought about a catastrophe. The\nneighbouring state of Ch\u2018i, jealous of the new prosperity of Lu under\nthe r\u00e9gime of the sage, cunningly sent as a gift to the prince a\nband of beautiful women, trained in song and dance, and a number of\nmagnificent horses, in order to distract his mind from the serious\ncares of state. The plotters had evidently taken the measure of their\nvictim, for the artifice succeeded, and Confucius felt compelled to\nresign. Then began the weary years of wandering from state to state, in\nwhich we cannot follow him here, except to note a sagacious prophecy\nuttered by a friendly official on the frontier of Wei. Coming out from\nan interview with Confucius, he comforted the woebegone disciples by\ntelling them that their Master's divine mission was now only just\nbeginning.[2] It may, indeed, be that the ensuing period of homeless\nexile, hardships and danger, did more to spread the fame of the great\nreformer than either the few brilliant years of office or those spent\nas a teacher in the comparative seclusion of Lu. For one thing, it\ncould not but inspire and fortify his followers to observe that the\nlofty principles which a sudden accession to power had failed to\ncorrupt, were equally capable of standing the test of adversity. His\nserene and courageous bearing in many a strange and perilous situation\nproved that the conception of a \"higher type of man\" was for him no\nempty ideal, but the worthy object of practical endeavour. It is sad,\nhowever, to reflect that the best years of his life had passed before\nthe call came which resulted in his return. Had it not been so long\ndelayed, he would doubtless have thrown himself once more into the\narena of public affairs, and begun rebuilding the fabric of good\ngovernment which had been so rudely shattered thirteen years before.\nHis patience would have been equal to the task; but he was now an old\nman, worn out by years of travel, privation and anxiety, at a time of\nlife when the physical frame begins to demand a certain measure of\nquiet and repose. Hence, though he may be said to have returned to his\nnative state with flying colours, he took no further active part in its\nadministration, but devoted the rest of his life to literary labours\nwhich have added materially to his fame. Such were the collecting\nand editing of certain old national ballads known to us as the Odes,\nand the penning of the Spring and Autumn Annals of Lu, which may be\nregarded as the first real record of authentic facts, as opposed to the\nmere string of speeches and eulogies which we find in the miscalled\nBook of History.\n\nTo this closing period, too, are to be referred most of the sayings\ngiven in the present volume. These, together with the invaluable\nbiography by Ss\u016d-ma Ch'ien, which is largely built upon them, form the\nonly really reliable source of information about Confucius and his\ndoctrines. The Chinese title _Lun Y\u00fc_ may be rendered \"Conversations\"\nor \"Discussions,\" but neither is a very apt description of the work,\nwhich contains very little discussion in the ordinary sense. It\nconsists in fact almost wholly of detached _obiter dicta_, or replies\nto questions put by various disciples on subjects chiefly moral or\npersonal. These sayings were once supposed to have been collected and\ncommitted to writing by the immediate disciples of Confucius, but Legge\nhas shown sufficient reason to believe that they were transmitted\norally at first, and did not take the form in which we have them\nuntil at least two generations after the Master's death. Nor must it\nbe imagined that they represent the _ipsissima verba_ of Confucius.\nNo man could have made offhand remarks in such a crisp, concise and\nepigrammatic style. A translation, in which brevity has again and again\nto be sacrificed to smoothness and lucidity, hardly allows the European\nreader to form any idea of the glittering compactness of these sayings\nin the original. So far from having been uttered impromptu, they\nappear to have been repeatedly ground and polished, and shorn of every\nredundancy, until they shone like diamonds fresh from the hands of the\ncutter. At the same time, as expressing the essence of what the Master\nthought and the substance of what he said, it is with good reason that\nthey are to be found inscribed on hundreds of thousands of scrolls\nand tablets in every corner of the Empire. These gems, however, are\nunsorted. As in most Chinese philosophical works, there is very little\nattempt at orderly arrangement; even such a rough classification as\nwill be found in this volume is absent. This is not necessarily to be\nregarded as a defect: jewels jumbled in a heap often have a charm which\nthey lack when strung symmetrically into a necklace. The only danger\nis that unwary readers, looking in vain for a beginning, a middle\nand an end, may jump to the conclusion that Confucius himself was\nmerely a master of casual apophthegms; they may very easily miss the\nconnecting principles which serve to bind the Confucian teachings into\none rounded system. Even the disciples seem to have been in danger of\noverlooking the whole in their admiration of the parts. It needed the\npenetration of Ts\u00eang Tz\u016d to tell them that the Master's Way was, after\nall, simple in its diversity, and might be summed up in two words: duty\nto oneself and charity to one's neighbour. Unhappily, owing to the\nmisinterpretation of these important words, the beautiful simplicity of\nthe Confucian doctrine has long passed unrecognised.\n\nFor what has been, and is perhaps even now, the prevailing conception\nof Confucius in the West? Does not the name conjure up in most minds\nthe figure of a highly starched philosopher, dry, formal, pedantic,\nalmost inhuman in the unimpeachable correctness of his personal\nconduct, rigid and precise in his notions of ceremonial, admirable\nno doubt in his sentiments, but always more a man of words than of\ndeeds? He has been constantly accused of laying undue weight on things\nexternal, of undervaluing natural impulses of the heart. \"Propriety,\"\nsays Legge, \"was a great stumbling-block in the way of Confucius. His\nmorality was the result of the balancings of his intellect, fettered by\nthe decisions of men of old, and not the gushings of a loving heart,\nresponsive to the promptings of Heaven, and in sympathy with erring and\nfeeble humanity.\" It is high time that an effective protest was made\nagainst such an amazing piece of misrepresentation. With bitter truth\nwe may retort that \"propriety\"--that is, the Chinese word _li_ which\nhas been cruelly saddled with this absurd rendering--has indeed been\na stumbling-block, but a stumbling-block not so much to Confucius as\nto Dr. Legge himself. The whole tenor of the Master's teaching cries\naloud against such wilful and outrageous distortion. Any one who reads\nthe sayings carefully will soon discover that this accusation is not\nonly libellous but grotesque in its remoteness from the truth. If there\nis one thing more than another which distinguishes Confucius from the\nmen of his day, it is the supreme importance which he attached to\n_j\u00ean_, the feeling in the heart, as the source of all right conduct,\nthe stress which he laid on the internal as opposed to the external,\nand even on motives rather than outward acts, except in so far as\nthese might be taken as an index to character. Over and over again\nhe gave proof of the highest and noblest moral courage in ignoring\nthe narrow rules of conventional morality and etiquette when these\nconflicted with good feeling and common sense, and setting up in their\nstead the grand rule of conscience which, by asserting the right of\neach individual to judge such matters for himself, pushed liberty to\na point which was quite beyond the comprehension of his age. So far\nfrom being \"fettered by the decisions of men of old,\" it was his hand\nthat valiantly essayed to strike the fetters of bigotry and prejudice\nfrom the necks of his countrymen. But whilst declining to be bound by\nthe ideas and the standards of others, he was not blind to the danger\nof liberty degenerating into license. The new fetters, therefore,\nthat he forged for mankind were those of an iron self-discipline and\nself-control, unaccompanied, however, by anything in the shape of\nbodily mortification, a practice which he knew to be at once more showy\nand less troublesome than the discipline of the mind.\n\nAnother charge not infrequently heard is one of a certain repellent\ncoldness of temperament and stiffness of demeanour. The warrant for\nsuch a statement is not so readily forthcoming, unless indeed it is\nto be found in the stiff and repellent style which characterises some\ntranslations of his sayings. In the Analects we are told the exact\nopposite of this. The Master, we read there, was uniformly cheerful\nin demeanour, and he evidently unbent to quite an unusual extent with\nhis disciples, considering the respect and deference universally shown\nto age and learning in China. Is it at all conceivable that a man of\ncold and unlovable temper should have attracted round him hundreds\nof disciples, with many of whom he was on terms of most intimate\nintercourse, meeting them not only in the lecture-room, as modern\nprofessors meet their classes, but living with them, eating, drinking,\nsleeping and conversing with them, until all their idiosyncrasies,\ngood or bad, were better known to him than to their own parents? Is it\nexplicable, except on the ground of deep personal affection, that he\nshould have been followed into exile by a faithful band of disciples,\nnot one of whom is known ever to have deserted or turned against him?\nIs coldness to be predicated of the man who in his old age, for once\nlosing something of his habitual self-control, wept passionately for\nthe death of his dearly loved disciple Yen Hui, and would not be\ncomforted?\n\nBut it has been reserved for the latest English translator of the\nAnalects, the Rev. Mr. Jennings, to level some of the worst charges\nat his head. To begin with, he approvingly quotes, as Legge's final\nopinion on Confucius, words occurring in the earliest edition of the\nChinese Classics to the effect that he is \"unable to regard him as a\ngreat man,\" quite heedless of the fact that the following stands in\nthe edition of 1893 (two years before his own translation appeared):\n\"But I must now leave the sage. I hope I have not done him injustice;\nthe more I have studied his character and opinions, the more highly\nhave I come to regard him. _He was a very great man_, and his influence\nhas been on the whole a great benefit to the Chinese, while his\nteachings suggest important lessons to ourselves who profess to belong\nto the school of Christ.\" This summing-up, though certainly unexpected\nin view of much that has gone before, does partly atone for the unjust\nstrictures which Dr. Legge felt it necessary to pass on Confucius\nat an earlier period, though it may require many years entirely\nto obliterate their effect. What I wish to emphasise at present,\nhowever, is the unfairness of quoting an early and presumably crude\nand ill-considered opinion in preference to the latest and maturest\njudgment of an authority who at no time can be said to err On the side\nof over-partiality for his subject.\n\nBut this is not all. For after pointing out, truly enough, that\nConfucius cannot well be blamed for \"giving no impulse to religion,\"\ninasmuch as he never pretended to make this his aim, Mr. Jennings goes\non to pick some holes on his own account, and incontinently falls\ninto exactly the same error that he had previously rebuked in Dr.\nLegge. \"In his _reserve_ about great and important matters, while\nprofessing to teach men, he is perhaps most to blame, and in his\nholding back what was best in the religion of the ancients.\" What these\ngreat and important matters were, is not made very clear, but if, as\nseems probable, the phrase is simply another way of referring to \"the\nreligion of the ancients,\" it can only be repeated that religion was\na subject which he disliked to discuss and certainly did not profess\nto teach, as is plainly indicated in the Analects. And the reason why\nhe refrained from descanting on such matters was that, knowing nothing\nof them himself, he felt that he would have been guilty of hypocrisy\nand fraud had he made a show of instructing others therein. Would that\na like candour distinguished some of our own professed teachers of\nreligion!\n\nThe last accusation against Confucius is the most reckless of all.\n\"There is,\" according to Mr. Jennings, \"a certain _selfishness_ in\nhis teaching, which had the effect of making those who came under his\ninfluence soon feel themselves great and self-satisfied.\" As only the\nfeeblest of evidence is produced to support this wild statement, it\nwill not be necessary to consider it at any length, though we may ask\nin passing whether Yen Hui, the disciple who profited most from his\nMaster's teaching and best exemplified it, is depicted as exhibiting\nthis alleged self-satisfaction in a peculiarly noticeable degree. For\nan answer to this question the reader may be referred to Ts\u00eang Tz\u016d's\nremarks on p. 128.\n\nThe truth is, though missionaries and other zealots have long attempted\nto obscure the fact, that the moral teaching of Confucius is absolutely\nthe purest and least open to the charge of selfishness of any in\nthe world. Its principles are neither utilitarian on the one hand\nnor religious on the other, that is to say, it is not based on the\nexpectation of profit or happiness to be gained either in this world or\nin the next (though Confucius doubtless believed that well-being would\nas a general rule accompany virtuous conduct). \"Virtue for virtue's\nsake\" is the maxim which, if not enunciated by him in so many words,\nwas evidently the corner-stone of his ethics and the mainspring of\nhis own career. Not that he would have quite understood the modern\nformula, or that the idea of virtue being practised for anything but\nits own sake would ever have occurred to his mind. Virtue resting on\nanything but its own basis would not have seemed to him virtue in the\ntrue sense at all, but simply another name for prudence, foresight,\nor cunning. Yet material advantage, disguised as much as you will,\nbut still material advantage in one form or another, is what impels\nmost men to espouse any particular form of religion. Hence it is\nnothing less than a standing miracle that Confucianism, which makes\nno promise of blessings to be enjoyed in this life or the next, should\nhave succeeded without the adjunct of other supernatural elements than\nthat of ancestor-worship. Even this was accepted by Confucius as a\nharmless prevailing custom rather than enjoined by him as an essential\npart of his doctrine. Unlike Christianity and Mahometanism, the Way\npreached by the Chinese sage knows neither the sanction of punishment\nnor the stimulus of reward in an after-life. Even Buddhism holds out\nthe hope of Nirvana to the pure of heart, and preaches the long torment\nof successive rebirths to those who fall short of perfect goodness.\nNo great religion is devoid of elevated precepts, or has ever failed\nto mould numbers of beautiful characters to attest the presence of\nsomething good and great within it. But in every case the element\nof supernaturalism, which is of course inseparable from a religion\nproperly so called, introduces a new motive for men's actions and makes\nit no longer possible for virtue to be followed purely for its own\nsake, without thought of a hereafter. Thus, if we assent to Comte's\nfamous law of the Three States, Confucianism really represents a more\nadvanced stage of civilisation than biblical Christianity. Indeed, as\nMr. Carey Hall has recently pointed out in an article on the subject,\nConfucius may be regarded as the true fore-runner runner of Comte in\nhis positivist mode of thought.\n\nHis whole system is based on nothing more nor less than the knowledge\nof human nature. The instincts of man are social and therefore\nfundamentally good, while egoism is at bottom an artificial product and\nevil. Hence the insistence on altruism which we find in the sayings\nof Confucius, the injunction to \"act socially,\" to live for others in\nliving for oneself. The most important word in the Confucian vocabulary\nis _j\u00ean_, which in the following extracts is translated \"virtue\" only\nfor want of a better term. Our English word \"virtue\" has so many\ndifferent shades of meaning and is withal so vague, that in using it,\nthe idea of altruism is often hardly present to our mind. But in _j\u00ean_\nthe implication of \"social good\" emerges much more distinctly. Its\nconnotation has no doubt extended gradually until it seems often to be\nrather a compendium of all goodness than any one virtue in particular.\nBut this development only means that the word is following in the track\nof the thing itself. For let a man be but thoroughly imbued with the\naltruistic spirit, and he may be termed \"good\" without qualification,\nsince all other virtues tend to flow from unselfishness.\n\nThe Confucian theory of man's social obligations rests first and\nforemost on the fact that he forms part of a great social machine--an\naggregation of units, each of which is called a family. The family, in\nChinese eyes, is a microcosm of the Empire, or rather, since the family\nis chronologically prior to the State, it is the pattern on which the\ngreater organism has moulded itself. The feudal system under which\nConfucius lived naturally accentuated the likeness. The Emperor had,\nin theory at least, paternal authority over his feudal princes, who\nin turn, standing to one another in the relation of elder and younger\nbrothers, were regarded as the fathers of their respective peoples.\nNow, the way to ensure that a machine as a whole may run smoothly and\nwell, is to see that each part shall fulfil its own function in proper\nsubordination to the rest. How is this result achieved in the family?\nObviously through the controlling will of the father, who has supreme\nauthority over all the other members. But this authority is not by any\nmeans the mere brute force of a tyrant. It is based firstly on the\nnatural order of things, whereby the father is clearly intended to be\nthe protector of his children; and secondly, as a consequence of this,\non the love and respect which will normally spring up in the minds of\nthe children for their protector. Such is the genesis of filial piety,\nwhich plays so large a part in Chinese ethics. It is quite untrue,\nhowever, to say with Mr. Jennings, that no corresponding parental\nduties are recognised by Confucius, as the following anecdote may\nserve to show. During the sage's short period of office as Minister\nof Crime, a father came to him bringing some serious charge against\nhis son. Confucius kept them both in prison for three months, without\nmaking any difference in favour of the father, and then let them go.\nThe Minister Chi Huan remonstrated with him for this, and reminded him\nof his saying, that filial duty was the first thing to be insisted on.\n\"What hinders you now from putting this unfilial son to death as an\nexample to all the people?\" Confucius' reply was, that the father had\nnever taught his son to be filial, and that therefore the guilt really\nrested with him.\n\nFor the harmonious working of a family, then, we need respect for\nauthority on one side, and self-sacrifice on the other. The father's\nobject must be entirely altruistic--the good of his family. Then\nonly will he be doing his duty as a father, just as a son is not\ndoing his duty unless he shows honour and obedience to his parents.\nThe all-important element which makes possible the working of the\nfamily machine, the lubricating oil that eases the bearings, is not\nmerely filial piety without any corresponding feeling on the part\nof the parent, but rather a certain subtle principle of harmony and\nself-control permeating every member of the family group, which\nrestrains egoistic propensities and promotes the common good. This is\nthe Chinese term _li_, which in this sense of a quality of the soul\nis hardly translatable by any single word or combination of words,\nbut is certainly not to be rendered by any such atrocious phrase as\n\"the rules of propriety.\"[3] Now Confucius saw that the same general\nprinciples which govern the family are applicable also to that greatest\nof families, the State. Here we have the Emperor, in whose hands the\nsupreme authority must lie, exercising functions exactly analogous to\nthose of the father of a family. But if his is the supreme authority,\nhis must also be the supreme responsibility. Veneration and respect\nare his due, but only because he identifies himself with the good of\nthe people. In public affairs, just as in the home, there must be\nthat same principle of harmony to regulate the relations of governor\nand governed, otherwise the machine will not work. There must be _li_\nhere as well, but as it is not possible for the sovereign to maintain\nwith his subjects the personal intimacy which unites a father and\nhis sons, it is necessary to fall back upon symbols, and to give\noutward and visible expression to the inward sentiments of loyalty and\nrespect which should animate the breast of each member of the nation.\nThese symbols are the rites and ceremonies of which Confucius was\nconsidered such a past-master. He saw indeed their full importance\nas symbols, but he also knew that, divorced from the inward feeling,\nthey were meaningless and without value. In this way it is easy to see\nhow the word _li_, as a human attribute, acquired its various shades\nof meaning, from the harmony in the soul which prompts action in\naccordance with true natural instincts, down to ordinary politeness and\ngood manners--also an indispensable lubricant in the lesser dealings of\nlife between man and man.\n\nIt was in the family again that Confucius found a natural force at work\nwhich he thought might be utilised as an immense incentive to virtue.\nThis was the universal human proneness to imitation. Knowing that\npersonal example is the most effective way in which a father can teach\nhis sons what is right, he unhesitatingly attributed the same powerful\ninfluence to the personal conduct of the sovereign, and went so far as\nto declare that if the ruler was personally upright, his subjects would\ndo their duty unbidden; if he was not upright, they would not obey,\nwhatever his bidding. \"The virtue of the prince,\" he said, \"is like\nunto wind; that of the people, like unto grass. For it is the nature of\ngrass to bend when the wind blows upon it.\" It must be admitted that\nConfucius has in this particular somewhat overshot the mark and formed\ntoo sanguine an estimate of the force of example. It would be unfair,\nhowever, to base our argument on the analogy of modern democratic\nstates, where the controlling power is split up into several branches,\nand the conspicuousness of the monarch is much diminished. Not that\neven the constitutional sovereign of to-day may not wield a very\ndecided influence in morals. But this influence was much greater while\nthe king retained full despotic power, and greatest of all in feudal\ntimes, when the successive gradations of rank and the nice arrangement\nof a hierarchy of officials, each accountable to the one above him,\nwere specially designed to convey and filter it among all classes of\nthe community. Had Confucius been able to find a prince who would have\nacted consistently on Confucian principles, the results might have been\nalmost as grand as he anticipated. The experiment was tried, we must\nremember, on a small scale, when Confucius himself became governor of\na town in the State of Lu. And although one must be chary of accepting\nall the extravagant tales which gathered round his brief official\ncareer, it seems indisputable that this political theory, unlike many\nothers, proved reasonably successful in actual practice.\n\nOf course the weak point is that every king cannot be a Confucius,\nand unless some practical method can be devised of electing rulers\non the ground of merit alone, it is impossible to ensure that their\nconduct shall serve as a pattern to their people. \"Rotten wood cannot\nbe carved,\" the Master himself once remarked, and he found bitter\nconfirmation of his saying in Duke Ting of Lu. Nothing could ever have\nbeen made out of such utterly weak and worthless material. And he\nafterwards spent thirteen years of his life in the fruitless search\nfor a sovereign who would correspond even faintly to his ideal. Such\nunswerving devotion to the abstract cause of right and justice and\ngood government cannot but puzzle those who have been taught to regard\nConfucius as the very type and embodiment of materialistic wisdom and\npractical utilitarianism. But in truth, strange though it may sound,\nhe was a great idealist who gained his hold on his countrymen by\nvirtue rather of his noble imaginings and lofty aspirations than of\nany immediate results or tangible achievements. By the men of his own\nday he was more often than not considered a charlatan and an impostor.\nIt is remarkable that even the two Taoist recluses and the eccentric\nChieh Y\u00fc (p. 122) should have condemned him as a visionary and a\n\"crank.\" Similar was the impression he made on the gate-keeper who\nasked a disciple if his Master was the man \"who was always trying to\ndo what he knew to be impossible.\" This playful sarcasm is really the\nbest commentary on his career, and one that pays him unintentionally\nthe greatest honour. Though often disheartened by the long and bitter\nstruggle against adverse circumstance and the powers of evil, he never\ngave over in disgust. Therein lay his greatness. \"Wer immer strebend\nsich bem\u00fcht, Den k\u00f6nnen wir erl\u00f6sen,\" sing the angels in _Faust_, and\nno man ever toiled for the good of his fellow-creatures with greater\nperseverance or with less apparent prospect of success. In this, the\ntruest sense, he could say that his whole life had been a prayer (p.\n87). He succeeded in that he seemed to fail. He never achieved the\nUtopian object of reforming all mankind by means of a wise and good\nsovereign. On the contrary, after his death confusion grew worse\nconfounded, and the din of arms rose to a pitch from which it did not\nsubside until after the momentous revolution which swept away the\nChou dynasty and established a new order of things in China. In a\nradically individualistic and liberty-loving country like China, the\nfeudal system was bound sooner or later to perish, even as it perished\nin a later day among ourselves. But throughout the anarchy of that\nterrible period, the light kindled by Confucius burned steadily and\nprepared men's minds for better things. His ideal of government was\nnot forgotten, his sayings were treasured like gold in the minds of\nthe people. Above all, his own example shone like a glorious beacon,\ndarting its rays through the night of misery and oppression and\ncivil strife which in his lifetime he had striven so earnestly to\nremove. And so it came about that his belief in the political value of\npersonal goodness was in some sort justified after all; for the great\nand inspiriting pattern which he sought in vain among the princes of\nhis time was to be afforded in the end by no other than himself--the\n\"throneless king,\" who is for ever enshrined in the hearts of his\ncountrymen. It is absurd, then, to speak of his life as a failure.\nMeasured by results--the almost incalculably great and far-reaching\nconsequences which followed tardily but irresistibly after he was\ngone--his life was one of the most successful ever lived by man. Three\nothers, and only three, are comparable to it in world-wide influence:\nGautama's self-sacrificing sojourn among men, the stormy career of\nthe Arab Prophet, and the \"sinless years\" which found their close on\nGolgotha.\n\n\n\n[1] See p. 121.\n\n[2] See p. 118.\n\n[3] See note on p. 60.\n\n\n\n\nLIST OF THE PRINCIPAL DISCIPLES\n\n\nThe proper names occurring in the Analects present some difficulty to\nthe European reader, as one and the same person is often referred to\nin several different ways--by his surname and personal name, by his\n\"style,\" or by a combination of the two, while among intimates the\npersonal name only is employed. Mr. Ku has on this account eliminated\nalmost all proper names from his translation, using a periphrasis\ninstead. But by this method one misses much of the characterisation\nwhich is such an attractive feature of the Analects. I have judged\nit better to give the names of the principal disciples exactly as\nthey appear in the Chinese, and to provide a table of their various\nappellations for easy reference. An asterisk denotes the name most\nfrequently used.\n\n   Surname and           Style.        Mixed Appellation.\n  Personal Name.\n\n    Yen Hui            Tz\u016d Y\u00fcan         Yen Y\u00fcan.*\n    Min Sun  }         Tz\u016d Ch\u2018ien       Min Tz\u016d-ch\u2018ien,*\n    (Min Tz\u016d)}\n    Jan K\u00eang           Po Niu*          Jan Po-niu.\n    Jan Yung           Chung Kung*\n    Jan Ch\u2018iu          Tz\u016d Yu           Jan Yu.*\n    Chung Yu           Tz\u016d Lu*}\n                       Chi Lu }\n    Tsai Y\u00fc            Tz\u016d Wo           Tsai Wo.*\n    Tuan-mu Tz\u2018\u016d       Tz\u016d Kung*\n    Yen Yen            Tz\u016d Y\u016d*          Yen Yu.\n    Pu Shang           Tz\u016d Hsia*\n    Chuan-sun Shih     Tz\u016d Chang*\n    Ts\u00eang Sh\u00ean  }      Tz\u016d Y\u016d\n    (Ts\u00eang Tz\u016d*)}\n    Fan Hs\u00fc            Tz\u016d Ch\u2018ih        Fan Ch\u2018ih.*\n    Ss\u016d-ma K\u00eang        Tz\u016d Niu          Ss\u016d-ma Niu.*\n    Kung-hsi Ch\u2018ih     Tz\u016d Hua          Kung-hsi Hua.*\n    Yu Jo    }         Tz\u016d Jo\n    (Yu Tz\u016d*)}\n\n\n\n\nGOVERNMENT AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS\n\n\nThe Master said: In ruling a country of a thousand chariots there\nshould be scrupulous attention to business, honesty, economy, charity,\nand employment of the people at the proper season.\n\nA virtuous ruler is like the Pole-star, which keeps its place, while\nall the other stars do homage to it.\n\nPeople despotically governed and kept in order by punishments may avoid\ninfraction of the law, but they will lose their moral sense. People\nvirtuously governed and kept in order by the inner law of self-control\nwill retain their moral sense, and moreover become good.\n\nDuke Ai[1] asked, saying: What must I do that my people may be\ncontented?--Confucius replied: Promote the upright and dismiss all\nevil-doers, and the people will be contented. Promote the\nevil-doers and dismiss the upright, and the people will be discontented.\n\nChi K\u2018ang Tzu[2] asked by what means he might cause his people to be\nrespectful and loyal, and encourage them in the path of virtue. The\nMaster replied: Conduct yourself towards them with dignity, and you\nwill earn their respect; be a good son and a kind prince, and you will\nfind them loyal; promote the deserving and instruct those who fall\nshort, and they will be encouraged to follow the path of virtue.\n\nSome one, addressing Confucius, said: Why, Sir, do you take no part in\nthe government?--The Master replied: What does the Book of History say\nabout filial piety?--Do your duty as a son and as a brother, and these\nqualities will make themselves felt in the government. This, then,\nreally amounts to taking part in the government. Holding office need\nnot be considered essential.\n\nThe people can be made to follow a certain path, but they cannot be\nmade to know the reason why.\n\nTzu Kung asked for a definition of good government. The Master replied:\nIt consists in providing enough food to eat, in keeping enough\nsoldiers to guard the State, and in winning the confidence of the\npeople.--And if one of these three things had to be sacrificed, which\nshould go first?--The Master replied: Sacrifice the soldiers.--And if\nof the two remaining things one had to be sacrificed, which should\nit be?--The Master said: Let it be the food. From the beginning, men\nhave always had to die. But without the confidence of the people no\ngovernment can stand at all.\n\nChing, Duke of the Ch\u2018i State, questioned Confucius on the art of\ngovernment. Confucius replied: Let the sovereign do his duty as a\nsovereign, the subject his duty as a subject, the father his duty as a\nfather, and the son his duty as a son.--A good answer! said the Duke;\nfor unless sovereign and subject, father and son do their respective\nduties, however much grain there may be in the land, I could obtain\nnone to eat.\n\nTzu Chang put a question about the art of governing. The Master said:\nDevote yourself patiently to the theory, and conscientiously to the\npractice, of government.\n\nChi K\u2018ang Tz\u016d asked Confucius for advice on the subject of government.\nConfucius replied: To govern is to keep straight.[3] If you, Sir, lead\nthe people straight, which of your subjects will venture to fall out of\nline?\n\nChi K\u2018ang Tz\u016d, being vexed by robbers, asked Confucius for his advice.\nConfucius replied, saying: If you, sir, can check your own cupidity,\nthere will be no stealing, even though rewards should be offered for\ntheft.\n\nChi K\u2018ang Tz\u016d questioned Confucius on a point of government, saying:\nOught not I to cut off the lawless in order to establish law and order?\nWhat do you think?--Confucius replied: Sir, what need is there of the\ndeath penalty in your system of government? If you showed a sincere\ndesire to be good, your people would likewise be good. The virtue of\nthe prince is like unto wind; that of the people, like unto grass. For\nit is the nature of grass to bend when the wind blows upon it.\n\nTz\u016d Lu asked for a hint on the art of governing. The Master replied:\nTake the lead and set the example of diligent toil.--Asked for a\nfurther hint, he said: Be patient and untiring.\n\nChung Kung, being Prime Minister to the head of the Chi clan, asked for\nadvice on governing. The Master said: Make a point of employing your\nsubordinates, overlook trifling mistakes, raise to office worthy and\nable men.--But, said Chung Kung, how am I to discover these worthy men\nand single them out for promotion?--Promote those that you know, was\nthe reply. As for those that you do not know, will not their claims be\nbrought before you by others?\n\nTz\u016d Lu said: The Prince of Wei is waiting, Sir, for you to take up\nthe reins of government. Pray what is the first reform you would\nintroduce?--The Master replied: I would begin by defining terms and\nmaking them exact.[4]--Oh, indeed! exclaimed Tzu Lu. But how can\nyou possibly put tilings straight by such a circuitous route?--The\nMaster said: How unmannerly you are, Yu! In matters which he does not\nunderstand, the wise man will always reserve his judgment. If terms are\nnot correctly defined, words will not harmonise with things. If words\ndo not harmonise with things, public business will remain undone. If\npublic business remains undone, order and harmony will not flourish.\nIf order and harmony do not flourish, law and justice will not attain\ntheir ends. If law and justice do not attain their ends, the people\nwill be unable to move hand or foot. The wise man, therefore, frames\nhis definitions to regulate his speech, and his speech to regulate his\nactions. He is never reckless in his choice of words.\n\nFan Ch\u2018ih asked to be taught the art of husbandry. The Master said:\nAny farmer can teach you that better than I can. He then asked to be\ntaught gardening. The Master said: Any gardener will teach you that\nbetter than I can. Fan Ch\u2018ih having gone out, the Master said: What a\nsmall-minded man is Fan Hs\u00fc! If the ruler is addicted to modesty and\nself-control, his people will not permit themselves to be irreverent.\nIf the ruler loves justice and duty, his people will not venture to be\nunruly. If the ruler loves sincerity and good faith, the people will\nnot be slow to respond. Such being his qualities, the people will flock\nto him from all quarters, with their babes strapped to their backs.\nWhat need for him to know the art of husbandry?[5]\n\nThe Master said: If the ruler is personally upright, his subjects will\ndo their duty unbidden; if he is not personally upright, they will not\nobey, whatever his bidding.\n\nWhen the Master went to Wei, Jan Yu drove his carriage. The Master\nsaid: What an abundant population!--Jan Yu said: Now that the people\nare so abundant, what is the next thing to be done?--Enrich them, said\nConfucius.--And having enriched them, what then?--Teach them, was the\nreply.\n\nThe Master said: If a country had none but good rulers for a hundred\nyears, crime might be stamped out and the death-penalty abolished. How\ntrue this saying is!\n\nIf a kingly sovereign were to appear, by the end of one generation\nnatural goodness would prevail.\n\nIf a man can reform his own heart, what should hinder him from taking\npart in government? But if he cannot reform his own heart, what has he\nto do with reforming others?\n\nDuke Ting[6] asked if there was a single sentence by which a country\nmight be made to flourish. Confucius answered: No single sentence can\nbe expected to have such a virtue as this. But there is the common\nsaying: \"To be a good king is difficult; to be a good minister is not\neasy.\" He who realises the difficulty of being a good king--has he not\nalmost succeeded in making his country prosper by a single sentence?\n--Is there a single sentence, continued the Duke, by which a country\ncan be ruined?--Confucius answered: No such power can reside in any\nsingle sentence. But there is a saying: \"I have no joy in kingly rule,\nI rejoice only because none can oppose my will.\" Now if the king's will\nis good, and none opposes it, all may be well; but if it is not good,\nand yet none opposes it, has he not almost succeeded in ruining his\ncountry be a single sentence?\n\nThe Duke of Sh\u00ea[7] asked about the conditions of good government. The\nMaster said: Government is good when it makes happy those who live\nunder it and attracts those who live far away.\n\nTz\u00fc Hsia, when governor of Ch\u00fc-fu,[8] asked for advice on government.\nThe Master said: Do not try to do things in a hurry. Do not be intent\non small gains. What is done quickly is not done thoroughly; and if\nsmall gains are considered, great things remain unaccomplished.\n\nTz\u016d Lu asked about the service due to a prince. The Master said: Use no\ndeceit, but if you oppose him, oppose him openly.\n\nThe Master said: If the ruler cherishes the principle of self-control,\nthe people will be docile to his commands.[9]\n\nShun[10] was one who did nothing, yet governed well. For what, in\neffect, did he do? Religiously self-observant, he sat gravely on his\nthrone, and that is all.[11]\n\nIn serving your prince, make the actual service your first care, and\nonly put the emolument second.\n\nThe head of the Chi clan was on the point of attacking the small\nprincipality of Chuan-y\u00fc. Jan Yu and Chi Lu came to see Confucius,\nand said: Our lord is going to have trouble with Chuan-y\u00fc.--Confucius\nsaid: Is it not you, Ch\u2018iu, who are to blame in this? The ancient\nkings long ago made Chuan-y\u00fc the centre of the worship of the Eastern\nM\u00eang mountain, and moreover it is situated within the territory of\nLu. Its ruler has independent priestly functions.[12] What right have\nyou to attack it?--Jan Yu replied: It is the will of our master;\nwe, his ministers, have neither of us any wish to act thus.--Ch\u2018iu,\nsaid Confucius, Chou J\u00ean[13] had a saying: \"If you are capable of\ndisplaying energy, hold office; if not, resign.\" Of what use is that\nminister likely to be, who does not sustain his master in the presence\nof danger, or support him when about to fall? Besides, what you say\nis wrong. If a tiger or a wild buffalo escapes from its cage, if a\ntortoise-shell or jade ornament is smashed in its casket, whose fault\nis it, pray?--Jan Yu replied: But Chuan-y\u00fc is strongly fortified, and\nclose to our own town of Pi. If we do not take it now, it will cause\ntrouble to our descendants in a later generation.--Confucius rejoined:\nCh\u2018iu, an honest man hates your hypocrite who will not openly avow his\ngreed, but tries instead to excuse it. I have heard that the ruler of\na state or of a clan is troubled not by the smallness of its numbers\nbut by the absence of even-handed justice; not by poverty but by the\npresence of discontent; for where there is justice there will be no\npoverty; where there is harmony there will be no lack in numbers;\nwhere there is content there will be no revolution. This being the\ncase then, if outlying communities resist your authority, cultivate\nthe arts of refinement and goodness in order to attract them; and\nwhen you have attracted them, make them happy and contented. Now you\ntwo, Yu and Ch\u2018iu, are aiding and abetting your master; here is an\noutlying community which resists your authority, and you are unable\nto attract it. Partition and collapse are imminent in your own State,\nand you are unable to preserve it intact. And yet you are planning\nmilitary aggression within the borders of your country! Verily I fear\nthat Chi-sun's [14]troubles will come, not from Chuan-y\u00fc, but from the\ninterior of his own palace.\n\nWhen the Master came to Wu-ch\u2018\u00eang, he heard the sound of singing and\nstringed instruments. He was pleased, but said with a smile: Is it\nnecessary to take a pole-axe to kill a fowl?--Tz\u016d Yu replied: Some\ntime ago, Sir, I heard you say that the study of true principles made\nthe ruler beneficent and men of the lower class easy to govern.--My\nchildren, said the Master, Yen is right. What I said was only in\njest.[15]\n\nTz\u016d Chang asked Confucius, saying: What are the essentials of good\ngovernment?--The Master said: Esteem the five excellent, and banish the\nfour evil things; then you will become fit to govern.--Tz\u016d Chang asked:\nWhat are the five excellent things?--The Master replied: The wise and\ngood ruler is benevolent without expending treasure; he lays burdens\non the people without causing them to grumble; he has desires without\nbeing covetous; he is serene without being proud; he is awe-inspiring\nwithout being ferocious.--He is benevolent without expending treasure:\nwhat does that mean?--The Master replied: He simply follows the course\nwhich naturally brings benefit to the people.[16] Is he not thus\nbenevolent without expending treasure? In imposing burdens, he chooses\nthe right time and the right means, and nobody can grumble. His desire\nis for goodness, and he achieves it; how should he be covetous? The\nwise and good ruler never allows himself to be negligent, whether he is\ndealing with many men or with few, with small matters or with great.\nIs this not serenity without pride? He has his cap and robe properly\nadjusted, and throws a noble dignity into his looks, so that his\ngravity inspires onlookers with respect. Is he not thus awe-inspiring\nwithout being ferocious?--Tz\u016d Chang then asked: What are the four evil\nthings?--The Master said: Cruelty:--leaving the people in their native\nignorance, yet punishing their wrong-doing with death. Oppression:--\nrequiring the immediate completion of tasks imposed without previous\nwarning. Ruthlessness:--giving vague orders, and then insisting on\npunctual fulfilment. Peddling husbandry:--stinginess in conferring the\nproper rewards on deserving men.[17]\n\n\n\n[1] _Ai_ was the honorary epithet of the Duke of Lu who was reigning\nduring the last years of Confucius' life.\n\n[2] Chi K\u2018ang Tzu succeeded to the headship of the great Chi family in\n491, when Chi Huan died, by whom he was advised to recall Confucius\nfrom his long wanderings. The sage, however, did not return until eight\nyears later.\n\n[3] The point of the original lies partly in the fact that the Chinese\nwords for \"govern\" and \"straight\" are similar in form and identical in\nsound.\n\n[4] The hidden meaning of this saying is made clear by the context\nto be found in Ss\u016d-ma Ch\u2018ien's biography of Confucius. The Prince of\nWei at this time was the young man mentioned on p. 128 as holding the\nthrone against his own father. By so doing he had in some sort inverted\nthe relationship which should have subsisted between them, and each was\nin a false position, the father being deprived of his proper parental\ndignity, and the son no longer \"doing his duty as a son\" (see p. 41).\nConfucius then is administering a veiled rebuke to the young ruler, for\nin saying that the first reform necessary is the correct definition\nof names, he implies in effect that the terms \"father\" and \"son,\"\namong others, should be made to resume their proper significance. An\nalternative rendering of _ch\u00eang ming_ as \"rectification of the written\ncharacter,\" though backed by the great authority of M. Chavannes, can\nonly be described as feeble and far-fetched, and has been ably confuted\nby Herr Franke in the _T'oung Pao_ for July, 1906.\n\n[5] Confucius is of course merely insisting on the principle of\ndivision of labour, and not by any means depreciating the value of\nhusbandry or other useful arts. It is not the ruler's business to make\nhimself proficient in these, because the task of governing and setting\nan example to the governed will claim all his attention. Compare\nPlato's disapproval of \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03c5\u03c0\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03bc\u03bf\u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b7, and Confucius' remarks on his\nown skill in various arts (p. 88).\n\n[6] The weak ruler of the Lu State (510-494 B.C.), who lost the\nservices of Confucius by his infatuation in accepting the insidious\ngift of eighty beautiful singing-girls from the Ch\u2018i State. See\nIntroduction, p. 16.\n\n[7] Sh\u00ea was a district of the Ch\u2018u State, which Confucius visited in\n488 B.C. The following anecdote, told by T\u2018an Kung, is a striking\nillustration of the above saying. Travelling with his disciples,\nthe Master came across a woman weeping and wailing beside a grave,\nand inquired the cause of her grief. \"Alas!\" she replied. \"My\nfather-in-law was killed here by a tiger; after that, my husband; and\nnow my son has perished by the same death.\"--\"But why, then, do you\nnot go elsewhere?\"--\"The government here is not harsh,\" answered the\nwoman.--\"There!\" cried the Master, turning to his disciples, \"remember\nthat. Bad government is worse than a tiger.\"\n\n[8] A small city in Lu.\n\n[9] Legge translates: \"When rulers love to observe the rules of\npropriety (!), the people respond readily to the calls on them for\nservice.\" All the other translators seem likewise to have missed the\npoint, which is elsewhere insisted on by Confucius--that no man is fit\nto govern others who cannot govern himself. On the meaning of _li_, see\nIntroduction, pp. 30 _seqq._, and note on p. 60.\n\n[10] A legendary Emperor.\n\n[11] This saying might have come straight from the mouth of a Taoist\nphilosopher. Nor is it the only place where Confucius seems to advocate\nquietism. Cf. p. 108.\n\n[12] Literally, \"a minister of the altars to the spirits of the land\nand grain\"; i.e. a direct vassal of the Emperor, and responsible only\nto him.\n\n[13] An ancient historiographer, of whom very little is known.\n\n[14] The head of the Chi clan mentioned above.\n\n[15] Wu\u2018Ch\u00eang means \"Martial city,\" so called from its impregnable\nposition. Tz\u016d Yu, when appointed governor, had succeeded in weaning the\npeople from their warlike propensities, and in introducing the milder\narts of peace. This is what made the Master glad, though he could not\nhelp being amused at the application of the loftiest principles to such\na tiny community. About ancient Chinese music we know unfortunately\nnext to nothing, but it seems to have played as important a part under\nthe Chou dynasty as in Plato's ideal State.\n\n[16] That is to say, the ruler will always keep the welfare of his\npeople in view, but without indulging in indiscriminate largess. The\never-increasing doles of money and corn with which the Roman Emperors\nwere obliged to buy the favour of the populace would thus have fallen\nunder the condemnation of Confucius.\n\n[17] The \"four evil things\" really turn out to be reducible to two,\nnamely (1) Cruelty--covering the first three; and (2) Meanness.\n\n\n\n\nINDIVIDUAL VIRTUE\n\n\nThe Master said: Is he not a princely man[1]--he who is never vexed\nthat others know him not?\n\nTrue virtue[2] rarely goes with artful speech and insinuating looks.\n\nAt home, a young man should show the qualities of a son; abroad, those\nof a younger brother. He should be circumspect but truthful. He should\nhave charity in his heart for all men, but associate only with the\nvirtuous. After thus regulating his conduct, his surplus energy should\nbe devoted to literary culture.\n\nIn the matter of food and lodging, the nobler type of man does not seek\nmere repletion and comfort. He is earnest in his affairs and cautious\nin his speech, and frequents virtuous company for his own improvement.\nHe may be called one truly bent on the study of virtue.[3]\n\nM\u00eang I Tz\u016d[4] asked for a definition of filial piety. The Master said:\nIt consists in there being no falling off.[5]--Fan Ch\u2018ih was driving\nthe Master's carriage some time after, when the latter told him,\nsaying: M\u00eang I Tz\u016d asked me about filial piety, and I answered that it\nconsisted in there being no falling off.--Fan Ch'ih said: What did you\nmean?--The Master replied: That parents should be served in the proper\nspirit while living, buried with the proper rites after death, and\nworshipped thereafter with the proper sacrifices.\n\nM\u00eang Wu Po[6] asked for a definition of filial piety. The Master said:\nThere is filial piety when parents are spared all anxiety about their\nchildren except when they happen to fall sick.[7]\n\nTz\u016d Yu put a question on the subject of filial piety. The Master said:\nThe filial piety of to-day reduces itself to the mere question of\nmaintenance. Yet this is something in which even our dogs and horses\nhave a share.[8] Without the feeling of reverence, what is there to\ndistinguish the two cases?\n\nTz\u016d Hsia also asked about filial piety. The Master said: It can hardly\nbe gauged from mere outward acts.[9] When there is work to be done,\nto relieve one's elders of the toil; or when there is wine and food,\nto cause them to partake thereof--is _this_ to be reckoned filial\npiety?[10]\n\nTz\u016d Kung inquired about the higher type of man. The Master replied: The\nhigher type of man is one who acts before he speaks, and professes only\nwhat he practises.\n\nThe Master said: The higher type of man is catholic in his sympathy\nand free from party bias; the lower type of man is biassed and\nun-sympathetic.\n\nA man without charity in his heart--what has he to do with ceremonies?\nA man without charity in his heart--what has he to do with music?[11]\n\nLin Fang inquired as to the prime essential in ceremonial observances.\nThe Master said: Ah, that is a great question indeed! In all rites,\nsimplicity is better than extravagance; in mourning for the dead,\nheartfelt sorrow is better than punctiliousness.\n\nThe Master said: The true gentleman is never contentious. If a spirit\nof rivalry is anywhere unavoidable, it is at a shooting-match. Yet\neven here he courteously salutes his opponents before taking up\nhis position, and again when, having lost, he retires to drink the\nforfeit-cup. So that even when competing he remains a true gentleman.\n\nIt is the spirit of charity which makes a locality good to dwell in. He\nwho selects a neighbourhood without regard to this quality cannot be\nconsidered wise.\n\nOnly he who has the spirit of goodness within him is really able either\nto love or to hate.\n\nThe princely man never for a single instant quits the path of virtue;\nin times of storm and stress he remains in it as fast as ever.\n\nThe nobler sort of man in his progress through the world has neither\nnarrow predilections nor obstinate antipathies. What he follows is the\nline of duty.\n\nThe nobler sort of man is proficient in the knowledge of his duty; the\ninferior man is proficient only in money-making.\n\nIn serving his father and mother, a son may use gentle remonstrance;\nif he sees that they pay no heed, he should not desist, but merely\nincrease in deference; if his pains are thrown away, he must show no\nresentment.\n\nWhile one's parents are alive, one should not travel to a distance; if\none must travel, it should be in a fixed direction.[12]\n\nThe age of one's parents should always be kept in mind--on the one\nhand, as a subject for rejoicing; on the other, as a cause for alarm.\n\nThe wise man will be slow to speak but quick to act.\n\nTz\u016d Chang asked, saying: The Prime Minister Tz\u016d W\u00ean[13] held office\nthree times, but showed no joy; he lost it three times, but testified\nno concern. When he ceased to be Prime Minister, he was careful to\nexplain the political situation to his successor. What is your opinion\nof him?--\n\nThe Master said: He was loyal and conscientious.[14]--Had he not the\nhighest degree of moral virtue?--That I do not know; how can one judge\nof his moral virtue?--Tz\u016d Chang continued: When Ts\u2018ui Tz\u016d[15] slew\nthe Prince of Ch\u2018i, Ch\u2018\u00ean W\u00ean Tz\u016d, though the possessor of ten teams\nof war-horses, forsook his wealth and turned his back on the country.\nHaving come to another state, he said: \"Here they are as bad as our own\nminister Ts\u2018ui Tz\u016d,\" and departed. And he repeated this proceeding each\ntime that he came to a new state.[16] What is your opinion of him?--The\nMaster said: He was pure and incorruptible.--Had he not the highest\ndegree of virtue?--I cannot say; how is one to judge?\n\nThe Master said: When the solid outweighs the ornamental, we have\nboorishness; when the ornamental outweighs the solid, we have\nsuperficial smartness. Only from a proper blending of the two will the\nhigher type of man emerge. All men are born good. He who loses his\ngoodness and yet lives is lucky to escape.\n\nBetter than one who knows what is right is one who is fond of what is\nright; and better than one who is fond of what is right is one who\ndelights in what is right.\n\nFan Ch\u2018ih asked in what wisdom consisted. The Master said: Make\nrighteousness in human affairs your aim, treat all supernatural beings\nwith respect, but keep aloof from them--then you may be called wise.\nAsked about moral virtue, he replied: The virtuous man thinks of\nthe difficult thing[17] first, and makes material advantage only a\nsecondary consideration. This may be said to constitute moral virtue.\n\nThe Master said: The man of knowledge finds pleasure in the sea,\nthe man of virtue finds pleasure in the mountains.[18] For the man\nof knowledge is restless and the man of virtue is calm. The man of\nknowledge is happy, and the man of virtue is long-lived.\n\nThe higher type of man, having gathered wide objective knowledge from\nthe branches of polite learning, will regulate the whole by the inner\nrule of conduct,[19] and will thus avoid overstepping the limit.\n\nThat virtue is perfect which adheres to a constant mean. It has long\nbeen rare amongst men.\n\nTz\u016d Kung asked: What would you say of the man who conferred benefits\nfar and wide on the people and was able to be the salvation of all?\nWould you pronounce him a man of moral virtue?--Of moral virtue? said\nthe Master. Nay, rather, of divine virtue.[20] Even Yao and Shun were\nstill striving to attain this height.\n\nThe man of moral virtue, wishing to stand firm himself, will lend\nfirmness unto others; wishing himself to be illuminated, he will\nilluminate others. To be able to do to others as we would be done\nby[21]--this is the true domain of moral virtue.\n\nIt has not been my lot to see a divine man; could I see a princely\nman, that would satisfy me. It has not been my lot to see a thoroughly\nvirtuous man; could I see a man possessing honesty of soul, that would\nsatisfy me. Is it possible there should be honesty of soul in one who\npretends to have what he has not; who, when empty, pretends to be\noverflowing; who, when in want, pretends to be in affluence?\n\nThe higher type of man is calm and serene; the inferior man is\nconstantly agitated and worried.\n\nWith sincerity and truth unite a desire for self-culture. Lay down\nyour life rather than quit the path of virtue. Enter not the state\nwhich is tottering to its fall. Abide not in the state where sedition\nis rampant. When law obtains in the Empire, let yourself be seen; when\nlawlessness reigns, retire into obscurity. In a state governed on right\nprinciples, poverty and low station are things to be ashamed of; in an\nill-governed state, riches and rank are things to be ashamed of.\n\nThe man of wisdom does not vacillate; the man of natural goodness does\nnot fret; the man of valour does not fear.\n\nYen Y\u00fcan inquired as to the meaning of true goodness. The Master said:\nThe subdual of self, and reversion to the natural laws governing\nconduct--this is true goodness. If a man can for the space of one day\nsubdue his selfishness and revert to natural laws, the whole world will\ncall him good. True goodness springs from a man's own heart. How can it\ndepend on other men?--Yen Y\u00fcan said: Kindly tell me the practical rule\nto be deduced from this.--The Master replied: Do not use your eyes,\nyour ears, your power of speech or your faculty of movement without\nobeying the inner law of self-control.[22]--Yen Y\u00fcan said: Though I am\nnot quick in thought or act, I will make it my business to carry out\nthis precept.\n\nChung Kung inquired as to the meaning of true goodness. The Master\nsaid: When out of doors, behave as though you were entertaining a\ndistinguished guest; in ruling the people, behave as though you were\nofficiating at a solemn sacrifice; what you would not wish done to\nyourself, do not unto others.[23] Then in public as in private life\nyou will excite no ill-will. Chung Kung said: Though I am not quick in\nthought or act, I will make it my business to carry out this precept.\n\nSs\u016d-ma Niu inquired as to the meaning of true goodness. The Master\nsaid: The truly good man is slow of speech.[24]--Slowness of speech!\nIs this what goodness consists in?--The Master said: Does not the\ndifficulty of deciding what it is right to _do_ necessarily imply\nslowness to _speak_?\n\nSs\u016d-ma Niu asked for a definition of the princely man. The Master said:\nThe princely man is one who knows neither grief nor fear.--Absence of\ngrief and fear! Is this the mark of a princely man?--The Master said:\nIf on searching his heart he finds no guilt, why should he grieve? of\nwhat should he be afraid?\n\nTz\u016d Chang asked how to attain exalted virtue. ... The Master said: Make\nconscientiousness and truth your guiding principles, and thus pass on\nto the cultivation of duty to your neighbour. This is exalted virtue.\n\nThe Master said: The nobler sort of man emphasises the good qualities\nin others, and does not accentuate the bad. The inferior sort does the\nreverse.\n\nTz\u016d Chang asked: What must a man do in order to be considered\ndistinguished?--The Master said: What do you mean by the term\n\"distinguished\"?--Tz\u016d Chang replied: I mean one whose fame fills both\nhis own private circle and the State at large.--The Master said: That\nis notoriety, not distinction. The man of true distinction is simple,\nhonest, and a lover of justice and duty. He weighs men's words, and\nobserves the expression of their faces.[25] He is anxious to put\nhimself below others. Such a one is truly distinguished in his private\nand his public life. As to the man who is merely much talked about, he\nputs on an appearance of charity and benevolence, but his actions belie\nit. He is self-satisfied and has no misgivings. Neither in private nor\nin public life does he achieve more than notoriety.\n\nTz\u016d Kung asked a question about friendship. The Master said: Be\nconscientious in speaking to your friend, but tactful in your efforts\nto guide him aright. If these fail, stop. Do not court a personal\nrebuff.\n\nThe Duke of Sh\u00ea addressed Confucius, saying: We have an upright man\nin our country. His father stole a sheep, and the son bore witness\nagainst him.--In our country, Confucius replied, uprightness is\nsomething different from this. A father hides the guilt of his son, and\na son hides the guilt of his father. It is in such conduct that true\nuprightness is to be found.\n\nFan Ch\u2018ih asked a question about moral virtue. The Master said: In\nprivate life, show self-respect; in the management of affairs, be\nattentive and thorough; in your dealings with others, be honest and\nconscientious. Never abandon these principles, even among savages.\n\nThe Master said: The nobler sort of man is accommodating but not\nobsequious; the inferior sort is obsequious but not accommodating.\n\nThe nobler sort of man is easy to serve yet difficult to please. Who\nseeks to please him in wrongful ways will not succeed. In exacting\nservice from others, he takes account of aptitudes and limitations.\nThe baser sort of man is difficult to serve yet easy to please. Who\nseeks to please him in any wrongful way will assuredly succeed. And he\nrequires absolute perfection in those from whom he exacts service.\n\nThe nobler sort of man is dignified but not proud; the inferior man is\nproud but not dignified.\n\nHsien said: To refrain from self-glorification, to subdue feelings of\nresentment, to control selfish desire--may this be held to constitute\nperfect virtue?--The Master said: These things may certainly be\nconsidered hard to achieve, but I am not so sure that they constitute\nperfect virtue.[26]\n\nThe Master said: A man of inward virtue[27] will have virtuous words\non his lips, but a man of virtuous words is not always a virtuous man.\nThe man of perfect goodness[27b] is sure to possess courage, but the\ncourageous man is not necessarily good.\n\nCan true love be anything but exacting? How can our sense of duty allow\nus to abstain from admonition?\n\nThe nobler sort of man tends upwards; the baser sort tends downwards.\n\nThe princely type of man is modest in his speech, but liberal in his\nperformance.\n\nThe princely man has three great virtues, which I cannot claim for\nmyself. He is truly benevolent, and is free from care; he is truly\nwise, and is free from delusions; he is truly brave, and is free from\nfear.--Nay, replied Tz\u016d Kung, these virtues are our Master's own.[27]\n\nThe Master said: Is not he a sage who neither anticipates deceit nor\nsuspects bad faith in others, yet is prompt to detect them when they\nappear?\n\nSome one asked: How do you regard the principle of returning good for\nevil?--The Master said: What, then, is to be the return for good?\nRather should you return justice for injustice, and good for good.[28]\n\nTz\u016d Lu asked about the conduct of the princely man.[29] The Master\nsaid: He cultivates himself so as to gain in self-respect.--Does he\nrest content with that?--He cultivates himself, was the reply, so as to\ngive happiness to others.--And is he content with that?--He cultivates\nhimself so as to confer peace and prosperity on the whole people.\n\nBy self-cultivation to confer peace and prosperity on the whole\npeople!--was not this the object which Yao and Shun still laboured to\nattain?\n\nTz\u016d Kung asked for advice on the practice of moral virtue. The Master\nreplied: If an artisan wants to do his work well, he must begin by\nsharpening his tools. Even so, among the great men of your country, you\nshould serve the wise and good, and make friends of men who have this\nmoral virtue.\n\nThe Master said: The higher type of man makes a sense of duty the\ngroundwork of his character, blends with it in action a sense of\nharmonious proportion, manifests it in a spirit of unselfishness, and\nperfects it by the addition of sincerity and truth. Then indeed is he a\nnoble character.\n\nThe higher type of man seeks all that he wants in himself; the inferior\nman seeks all that he wants from others.\n\nThe higher type of man is firm but not quarrelsome; sociable, but not\nclannish.\n\nThe wise man does not esteem a person more highly because of what he\nsays, neither does he undervalue what is said because of the person who\nsays it.\n\nTz\u016d Kung asked, saying: Is there any one maxim which ought to be acted\nupon throughout one's whole life?--The Master replied: Surely the maxim\nof charity[30] is such:--Do not unto others what you would not they\nshould do unto you.\n\nThe nobler sort of man pays special attention to nine points. He is\nanxious to see clearly, to hear distinctly, to be kindly in his looks,\nrespectful in his demeanour, conscientious in his speech, earnest in\nhis affairs; when in doubt, he is careful to inquire; when in anger, he\nthinks of the consequences; when offered an opportunity for gain, he\nthinks only of his duty.\n\nTz\u016d Chang asked Confucius a question about moral virtue. Confucius\nreplied: Moral virtue simply consists in being able, anywhere and\neverywhere, to exercise five particular qualities. Asked what these\nwere, he said: Self-respect, magnanimity, sincerity, earnestness and\nbenevolence. Show self-respect, and others will respect you;[31]\nbe magnanimous, and you will win all hearts; be sincere, and men\nwill trust you; be earnest, and you will achieve great things; be\nbenevolent, and you will be fit to impose your will on others.\n\nTz\u016d Lu asked: Docs not the princely man[32] value courage?--The Master\nsaid: He puts righteousness first. The man of high station[33] who has\ncourage without righteousness is a menace to the State; the common man\nwho has courage without righteousness is nothing more than a brigand.\n\nTzu Kung asked: Has the nobler sort of man any hatreds?--The Master\nreplied: He has. He hates those who publish the faults of others; he\nhates men of low condition who vilify those above them; he hates those\nwhose courage is unaccompanied by self-restraint; he hates those who\nare audacious but narrow-minded. And you, Tz\u2018\u016d, he added, have you\nalso your hatreds?--I hate, replied the disciple, those who think\nthat wisdom consists in prying and meddling; courage, in showing no\ncompliance; and honesty, in denouncing other men.\n\n\n\n[1] This is the much-discussed _ch\u00fcn tz\u016d_, an expression of which the\nstereotyped English equivalent is \"the superior man.\" But in this there\nis, unhappily, a tinge of blended superciliousness and irony absolutely\nforeign to the native phrase, which in my opinion makes it unsuitable.\n\"Princely man\" is as nearly as possible the literal translation, and\nsometimes, as we shall see, it actually means \"prince.\" But in the\nmajority of cases the connotation of rank or authority is certainly\nnot explicit, and as a general rendering I have preferred \"the higher\ntype of man,\" \"the nobler sort of man,\" or sometimes more simply, \"the\ngood man.\" Perhaps the nearest approximation in any European language\nis to be found in the Greek \u1f41 \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u1f78\u03c2 \u03ba\u1f00\u03b3\u03b1\u03b8\u03cc\u03c2, because that implies high\nmental and moral qualities combined with all the outward bearing of a\ngentleman. Compare also Aristotle's \u1f41 \u03c3\u03c0\u03bf\u03c5\u03b4\u03b1\u1f32\u03bf\u03c2, who is however rather\nmore abstract and ideal.\n\n[2] _J\u00ean_, the term here translated \"virtue,\" is perhaps the most\nimportant single word in the Analects, and the real corner-stone\nof Confucian ethics. Its primary meaning, in accordance with the\netymology, is \"humanity\" in the larger sense, i.e. natural goodness\nof heart as shown in intercourse with one's fellow-men. Hence it\nis sometimes best translated \"loving-kindness\" or \"charity\" in the\nbiblical sense, though in many cases a more convenient, if vaguer,\nrendering is \"virtue,\" \"moral virtue,\" or even, as in Legge, \"perfect\nvirtue.\"\n\n[3] Literally, \"he may be called a lover of learning.\" But \"learning\"\nin the mouth of Confucius is generally to be understood as study of\nthe rules of right conduct with a view to their practical application.\nThe object of all learning was to enable a man to develop the natural\ngoodness within him, so as to lead a life of virtuous culture. It was\nnot pursued solely for its own sake, nor had it become, as with us,\ndivorced from all ethical significance.\n\n[4] The chief of the house of M\u00eang, one of the three great families of\nLu, and (according to Ss\u016d-ma Ch\u2018ien) a disciple of Confucius.\n\n[5] The reply is enigmatical, but it is clear from what follows that\nthis, and not, as Legge translates, \"disobedience,\" is the true meaning.\n\n[6] The eldest son of M\u00eang I Tz\u016d.\n\n[7] It is astonishing that Chu Hsi should have tried to improve on\nthe old commentators here, and almost equally astonishing that Legge\nshould have followed him, with this result: \"The Master said, Parents\nare anxious lest their children should be sick\" (and therefore children\nshould take care of their persons)!\n\n[8] Here again it is almost incredible that Legge should have adopted\nsuch a ridiculous interpretation as the following--without the\nauthority, this time, of Chu Hsi: \"The filial piety of nowadays means\nthe support of one's parents. But dogs and horses likewise are able\nto do something in the way of support.\" The image conjured up by this\nsentence is grotesque, to say the least.\n\n[9] Literally, \"colour difficult.\" This famous sentence, a\nstumbling-block to native and foreigner alike, surely marks the extreme\nlimit to which conciseness can be carried in Chinese. \"The difficulty\nis with the countenance\" is the lame translation offered by Legge,\nand later scholars have mostly followed in his footsteps, even Mr. Ku\nHung-ming failing badly for once. Where all have gone astray is in\ntaking the \"difficulty\" to exist in the mind of the would-be filial\nson, instead of being that felt by the onlooker who wishes to gauge\nthe genuineness of the quality in others. Only a few months ago, a new\nand ingenious interpretation was suggested by my father, Professor\nH. A. Giles, namely: \"To define it is difficult\"; but after much\nconsideration I am led to prefer the rendering in the text, inasmuch as\nthe word _s\u00ea_ is quite commonly used to denote the external as opposed\nto the internal, form as opposed to essence.\n\n[10] The answer of course is--No; outward acts do not constitute filial\npiety, unless prompted by a genuine duteous feeling in the heart.\n\n[11] A notable utterance, which may be commended to those who have been\ntaught to regard Confucius as a man of ceremonies and outward show.\n\n[12] In order that the parents may know where their son is.\n\n[13] Of the Ch\u2018u State.\n\n[14] The root idea of this word _chung_ is loyalty to _oneself_,\ndevotion to principle, or, as Mr. Ku Hung-ming well translates it,\nconscientiousness. Loyalty or fidelity to the sovereign is only an\nextended sense. Here the two ideas appear to be blended, but in a\nfamous passage to be noted further on (p. 118) much trouble has\nresulted from ignoring the first and fundamental meaning.\n\n[15] A high officer in Ch\u2018i, the state adjoining Lu.\n\n[16] The fact that Ch\u2018\u00ean W\u00ean Tz\u016d could not reconcile it with his\nconscience to settle in any of the states which he visited throws a\nlurid light on the disorder prevailing in the Empire at this period\n(547 B.C.). Murder and usurpation were evidently the rule rather than\nthe exception.\n\n[17] That is to say, the virtuous act, which he will perform for its\nown sake, regardless of consequences.\n\n[18] Each finds pleasure in that part of Nature which resembles himself.\n\n[19] As may be inferred from its composition, the character _li_\noriginally had sole reference to religious rites, whence however\nit came to be applied to every sort of ceremonial, including the\nordinary rules of politeness, the etiquette of society, the conduct\nbefitting all stations of life, and moreover to the state of mind\nof which such conduct is the outcome. This state of mind is one of\nequably adjusted harmony and self-restraint, and it is in this sense\nof an inward principle of proportion and self-control that the word\nis frequently used in the Analects. Why such a vile phrase as \"the\nrules of propriety\" was ever coined to express this subtle conception,\nand retained in every context, however inappropriate, must remain\nan insoluble mystery. Is it surprising that one of the greatest\nof world-teachers should still be waiting to come into his full\nheritage, when his sayings are made to suggest nothing so much as the\nheadmistress of a young ladies' seminary?\n\n[20] It is interesting to observe that Confucius allows a grade of\nheroic and almost divine virtue even above that which constitutes\ncomplete goodness for all practical purposes, just as Aristotle places\nhis \u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03cc\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u03ae\u03c1 above the \u03c3\u03ce\u03c6\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd.\n\n[21] It is only fair to mention that the above is not an exact\ntranslation of the words in the Chinese text, though I believe their\nimport to be what I have set down. The point is too technical and\nabstruse to be discussed here.\n\n[22] See note on p. 60. This is the solemn nonsense dished up by Legge:\n\"Look not at what is contrary to propriety; listen not to what is\ncontrary to propriety; speak not what is contrary to propriety; make no\nmovement which is contrary to propriety.\"\n\n[23] Confucius here, as in general, suits his reply to the questioner.\nIn answering Yen Y\u00fcan, the model disciple, he had gone to the very\nroot of the matter, making it clear that the essence of true goodness\nhas little or nothing to do with externals. To Chung Kung, who was\nless advanced and doubtless somewhat lacking in grace or dignity\nof demeanour, he gives more superficial advice, but winds up by\nenunciating the Golden Rule, which is the best practical manner of\nmanifesting inward goodness of heart.\n\n[24] There seems to be a play on this word which cannot be brought out\nin translation.\n\n[25] This probably means that he will not rely on words alone in\njudging of character.\n\n[26] Being too purely negative.\n\n[27] It is almost impossible, here and in other passages, to make any\nreal distinction of meaning between _te_, the manifestation of eternal\nprinciples in the soul of man, and _j\u00ean_, natural goodness of heart,\nthough the former, being more universal and abstract, may be said to\ninclude the latter, which generally implies a certain relation to one's\nfellow-men.\n\n[28] The principle of returning good for evil, which is here apparently\nrepresented as a well-known ethical doctrine, was first enunciated, so\nfar as we know, by Lao Tz\u016d. Confucius rejects this vain idealism, and\nadvocates the much sounder and more practical basis for society given\nin the text.\n\n[29] Here ch\u00fcn tz\u016d seems almost to denote an actual prince, not merely\na man with princely qualities.\n\n[30] Legge translates _shu_ \"reciprocity,\" apparently for no other\nreason than to explain the maxim that follows. But it really stands\nfor something higher than the strictly utilitarian principle of _do ut\ndes_. Both here and in another famous passage (see p. 118) it is almost\nequivalent to _j\u00ean_, goodness of heart, only with the idea of altruism\nmore explicitly brought out. It connotes sympathetic consideration for\nothers, and hence the best rendering would seem to be \"loving-kindness\"\nor \"charity.\" The concluding maxim is really nothing more nor less than\nthe Golden Rule of Christ, though less familiar to us in its negative\nform.\n\n[32] The Chinese have a proverb: \"A man must insult himself before\nothers will.\"\n\n[33] A good example of the fluctuating content of the term _ch\u00fcn tz\u016d_,\nwhich in the disciple's question implies morality without reference to\nrank, and in the Master's reply rank and authority without definite\nmoral qualities.\n\n\n\n\nCONFUCIUS' ESTIMATE OF OTHERS\n\n\nThe Master said: I may talk all day to Hui without his putting in\na word of criticism or dissent--just as though he were deficient\nin understanding. But after he has left me, I find, on examining\nhis private conduct, that he knows for all that how to exemplify my\nteaching. No! Hui is not deficient in understanding.\n\nTz\u016d Kung asked, saying: What, Sir, is your opinion of me?--I would\nliken you, Tz\u2018\u016d, replied the Master, to a vessel limited in its\nfunction.--What sort of vessel? asked Tz\u016d Kung.--A richly ornamented\nsacrificial vessel, was the reply.[1]\n\nSome one remarked that Yung had goodness of heart but no cleverness of\nspeech.--The Master said: Of what use is cleverness of speech? Those\nwho are always ready to assail others with their tongue are sure to\nmake themselves disliked. As to Yung's goodness of heart I have no\ncertain knowledge; but how would he benefit by having cleverness of\nspeech?\n\nThe Master said: My teaching makes no head-way. How and if I were to\nboard a raft and float away over the sea? My friend Yu would come with\nme, I feel sure.--Tz\u016d Lu, hearing this, was glad. The Master continued:\nYu surpasses me in his love of daring, but he lacks discretion and\njudgment.\n\nM\u00eang Wu Po asked whether Tz\u016d Lu had true moral virtue. The Master\nreplied: I do not know.--- Asked a second time, the Master said:\nYu might be trusted to organise the military levies of a large and\npowerful State, but whether he is possessed of true virtue I cannot\nsay.--And what is your opinion with regard to Ch\u2018iu?--The Master said:\nCh\u2018iu might be entrusted with the government of a district numbering a\nthousand households or a hundred war-chariots, but whether he has true\nvirtue I cannot say.--And Ch\u2018ih, what of him?--The Master said: Ch\u2018ih\nmight be employed to stand in his official dress at a royal levee and\nconverse with the visitors and guests; whether he has true virtue I\ncannot say.[2]\n\nThe Master addressing Tz\u016d Kung said: Which of the two is the better\nman, you or Hui?--Tz\u016d Kung replied: How can I venture to compare myself\nwith Hui? Hui hears one point and promptly masters the whole. I hear\none point and am only able to feel my way to a second.--The Master\nagreed: No, you are not equal to Hui; neither of us two[3] is equal to\nHui.\n\nTsai Y\u00fc used to sleep during the day. The Master said: Rotten wood\ncannot be carved, walls made of dirt and mud cannot be plastered:\n--what is the good of reprimanding Y\u00fc? At first, he continued, my way\nof dealing with others was to listen to their words and to take their\nactions upon trust. Now, my way is to listen to what they say and then\nto watch what they do. This change in me is owing to Y\u00fc.\n\nThe Master said: I have never yet met a really strong character.--Some\none suggested Sh\u00ean Ch\u2018\u00eang.--The Master said: Ch\u2018\u00eang is a slave to his\npassions. How can he possess strength of character?\n\nTz\u016d Kung said: I am anxious to avoid doing to others that which I\nwould not have them do to me. The Master said: Tz\u2018\u016d, you have not got\nas far as that.\n\nThe Master said of Tz\u016d Ch\u2018an[4] that he had four of the qualities of\nthe princely man:--in his personal demeanour he was grave, in serving\nthose above him he was attentive, in his care for the people he was\nkind, in his ordering of the people he was just.\n\nThe Master said: Yen P'ing[5] knows the art of associating with his\nfriends: however old the acquaintance may be, he always treats them\nwith the same respect.\n\nNing Wu Tz\u016d's[6] behaviour was wise so long as his country was well\ngoverned; when revolution came, his behaviour was stupid. His wisdom\nmay be equalled by others, but his stupidity is beyond all imitation.\n\nPo I and Shu Ch\u2018i[7] never remembered old injuries, and therefore\ntheir enemies were few.\n\nWho will say that Wei-sheng Kao[8] was an upright man? When asked by\nsomebody for some vinegar, he went and begged it of a neighbour, and\ngave this to the man who had asked him.\n\nFor the space of three months together Hui[9] would not deviate in\nspirit from the path of perfect virtue. My other disciples may attain\nthis height once in a day or in a month, but that is all.\n\nPo Niu[10] lying sick unto death, the Master went to visit him. He\nclasped his hand through the window and said: He is dying. Such is\nfate. Alas! that such a man should have such an illness, that such a\nman should have such an illness!\n\nThe Master said: Hui was indeed a philosopher! Other men living as he\ndid, in a miserable alley, with a single dish of food and a single bowl\nof drink, could not have endured the distress. But Hui was invariably\ncheerful. He was a philosopher indeed!\n\nJan Ch\u2018iu said: It is not that I have no joy in my Master's teaching,\nit is my strength that fails me.--The Master replied: Those whose\nstrength fails them fall fainting by the way. What you do is to set up\nbounds which you will not attempt to pass.\n\nThe Master said: M\u00eang Chih-fan is no braggart. Once after a defeat,\nwhen he was bringing up the rear, he whipped his horse as he was about\nto enter the city gate, and cried: It is not courage that makes me\nlast, it is my horse that won't gallop fast enough.[11]\n\nThe Master addressing Yen Y\u00fcan said: It is only you and I who would be\ncontent to accept public employment when it was offered to us, and to\nretire into obscurity when we were dismissed.--Tz\u016d Lu then said: If\nyou, Sir, had the conduct of three legions, whom would you associate\nwith yourself in the command?--I would not, replied the Master, choose\na man who would attack a tiger unarmed, cross a river without a boat,\nor sacrifice his life without a moment's regret. Rather should it be\none who would not embark on an enterprise without anxiety, and who was\naccustomed to lay his plans well before putting them into execution.[12]\n\nThe Master said: T\u2018ai Po may be said to have reached the summit of\nvirtue. Having resolutely renounced the Imperial throne, he put it out\nof the people's power to glorify his act of renunciation![13]\n\nIn the Emperor Y\u00fc[14] I find no loophole for censure. His own food\nand drink were plain, but his offerings to the ancestral spirits\nshowed extreme piety. His own garments were poor, but his robes and\ncap of state were extremely fine. His own dwelling was humble, but\nhe spent all his strength on the construction of public canals and\nwater-courses. I find no loophole for censure in Y\u00fc.\n\nAfter the word had gone forth, Hui was never backward in his deeds.\n\nThe Master speaking of Yen Y\u00fcan said: Ah, what a loss! I used to see\nhim ever progressing and never coming to a standstill.\n\nThe Master said: Yu, I fancy, is a man who would stand up, dressed in\nshabby garments quilted with hemp, among people attired in furs of fox\nand badger, and not be ashamed. \"Hating none and courting none, how\ncan he be other than good?\"[15]--As Tz\u016d Lu kept constantly humming\nover this line, the Master said: This rule of conduct is not enough by\nitself to constitute goodness.\n\nThe Master said: None of those who accompanied me on the journey to the\nstates of Ch\u2018\u00ean and Ts\u2018ai come to learn from me now.[16] Distinguished\nfor their virtuous conduct were Yen Y\u00fcan, Min Tz\u016d-ch\u2018ien, Jan Po-niu\nand Chung Kung; for their skill in speaking, Tsai Wo and Tz\u016d Kung; for\ntheir administrative powers, Jan Yu and Chi Lu; for their literary\nattainments, Tz\u016d Yu and Tz\u016d Hsia.\n\nHui does not help me[17]--he takes such delight in everything I say.\n\nWhat noble piety[18] is that of Min Tz\u016d-ch\u2018ien! Other men speak of him\nin exactly the same terms as his own parents and his own brethren.\n\nWhen Yen Y\u00fcan died, the Master wept with passionate grief, so\nthat those who were with him said: Master, your sorrow is too\npassionate.--Is it too passionate? he replied. Whose death should be a\ncause for violent grief, if not this man's?\n\nOn one occasion there were standing in attendance on the Master Min\nTz\u016d, looking gentle and mild; Tz\u016d Lu, looking upright and soldierly;\nJan Yu and Tz\u016d Kung, looking frank and affable. The Master was pleased.\n\"A man like Yu,\" he remarked, \"will not come by a natural death.\"[19]\n\nThe Master said: Why is Yu playing his martial music at my door?--The\ndisciples began to lose their respect for Tz\u016d Lu, whereupon the Master\nsaid: Yu has ascended the steps of the temple, though he has not yet\nreached the inner sanctuary.\n\nTz\u016d Kung asked which was the man of greater worth, Shih or Shang. The\nMaster replied: Shih exceeds and Shang falls short.--Then Shih is the\nbetter of the two?--The Master said: To exceed is as bad as to fall\nshort.\n\nThe head of the Chi clan was already richer than Chou Kung, yet Ch\u2018iu\nkept levying taxes for him and adding to his wealth.--He is no disciple\nof mine, said the Master. My children, you may beat the drum and attack\nhim.[20]\n\nThe Master said: Hui reaches the verge of perfection, yet he is often\nin great want. Tz\u2018\u016d does not resign himself to the will of Heaven,\nyet his worldly goods continue to increase. His judgments, however,\nfrequently hit the mark.\n\nTz\u016d Lu asked if he should at once put the precepts which he heard into\npractice.--The Master said: There are your father and elder brothers\nto consult first; why should you be so impatient to act on what you\nhear?--Jan Yu asked the same question, and the Master said: Yes, act\nat once according to the instruction that is given to you.--Kung-hsi\nHua then said: When Yu asked if he should put the precepts which he\nheard into practice, you replied, Sir, that he had his father and elder\nbrothers to consult first. When Ch\u2018iu asked the same question, you\nsaid:\n\n\"Act at once according to the instruction that is given to you.\" Now I\nam puzzled, and beg for an explanation.--The Master replied: Ch\u2018iu is\napt to hang back, therefore I press him on. Yu has eagerness enough for\ntwo, therefore I hold him back.\n\nChi Tz\u016d-jan[21] asked if Chung Yu and Jan Ch\u2018iu could be termed great\nministers. The Master said: I thought you had something extraordinary\nto ask about, and now it turns out to be a question about Yu and\nCh\u2018iu. What men call a great minister is one who serves his prince\naccording to the principles of truth and virtue, and when that is\nimpossible, resigns. Yu and Ch\u2018iu, however, can only be termed ordinary\nofficials.--Which is as much as to say that they will always obediently\nfollow their master's will?--The Master replied: They would not follow\nhim so far as to commit parricide or regicide.\n\nThe Master said: Yu is the man to settle a long litigation in a few\nwords.\n\nTz\u016d Kung was fond of weighing other men's merits and defects. The\nMaster said: Surely Tz\u2018u must be a very great sage! Personally, I have\nno time for this.\n\n\n\n\n\n[1] It is said elsewhere in the Analects (see p. 94) that \"the higher\ntype of man is unlike a vessel designed for some special use,\" which\nmeans that his moral capacity is not narrow and limited. Tz\u016d Kung,\nthen, it seems, had not fully grasped the higher principles of\nmorality, was wanting in breadth of mind and the larger outlook on\nlife. His aptitudes, however, were excellent so far as they went, and\nthe Master compliments him hero on his proficiency in things relating\nto religious ceremonial.\n\n[2] Confucius probably wished to impress upon his questioner that\ntrue moral virtue (fen) was deeply implanted in the soul, and not to\nbe gauged offhand from the presence or absence of certain superficial\nsigns.\n\n[3] It is passing strange that the clumsy \"I grant you\" for _wu y\u00fc ju_\n(I and you) should have found favour with translators. Wade even goes\none better, by translating: \"I award you this praise, Hui does not\nequal you \"!\n\n[4] Prime Minister of the Ch\u00eang State in the sixth century B.C. When he\nhad ruled for three years, so great was the change effected that \"doors\nwere not locked at night, and lost articles were not picked up on the\nhighway.\" Confucius wept when he heard of his death.\n\n[5] Minister in the neighbouring state of Ch\u2018i.\n\n[6] A minister of the Wei State in the seventh century B.C. In the\nrevolution referred to the prince was driven from his throne, but\nafterwards reinstated through the \"stupidity,\" that is to say, the\nunwavering loyalty and devotion of Ning.\n\n[7] These were brothers, celebrated for their protest against the\noverthrow of the Yin dynasty. Rather than live under the rule of the\nnew sovereign, the great and virtuous Wu Wang, they wandered away\ninto the mountains to perish of cold and hunger. This fidelity to the\ncause of Chou Hsin, one of the bloodiest and most infamous tyrants in\nhistory, seems a shade more quixotic than the conduct of those who\nespoused for so long the fallen fortunes of the house of Stuart.\n\n[8] This was a young man who, if legend may be trusted, died more\nheroically than he lived. He agreed to meet a girl under a bridge, but,\nwoman-like, she failed to keep her appointment. Though the water was\nrising rapidly, her lover waited on, unwilling to quit his post, and\nfinally clung to a pillar until he was drowned.\n\n[9] This is the man whom Confucius, according to Wade (see p. 73),\nranked below Tz\u016d Kung!\n\n[10] Po Niu is said to have been suffering from leprosy, and therefore\nhe would not allow visitors to enter his room.\n\n[11] Few will see anything harmful in this anecdote as told by\nConfucius. Yet it is actually made to figure in the general charge\nof insincerity and untruthfulness brought against him by Legge. \"The\naction was gallant,\" he says, \"but the apology for it was weak and\nunnecessary. And yet Confucius saw nothing in the whole but matter for\npraise.\" In the first place, Legge entirely ignores the possibility\nthat M\u00eang Chih-fan was really speaking the truth. But even if it were\notherwise, Confucius' only comment is that he was \"no braggart.\" Surely\nit is an overstrained morality that could be offended by this.\n\n[12] Compare Moltke's motto: \"Erst w\u00e4gen, dann wagen.\" Tz\u016d Lu was noted\nfor his reckless bravery. Evidently jealous of the praise bestowed\non Yen Y\u00fcan, he makes a delightfully artless attempt to secure some\nrecognition for himself, but only draws down a reproof. The Master's\nrelations with this vain, impulsive, good-hearted disciple often remind\none of those subsisting between Dr. Johnson and Goldsmith.\n\n[13] T\u2018ai Po was the direct heir to his father's throne, but knowing\nthat the latter wished to be succeeded by his youngest son (the father\nof the future W\u00ean Wang, the virtual founder of the Chou dynasty), he\nwent into voluntary exile among the barbarous tribes of the south, but\nkept the motives of his conduct to himself, and thus obtained no credit\nfor his self-sacrifice.\n\n[14] The \"Great Y\u00fc,\" who in the reign of the Emperor Yao laboured\nincessantly for eight years to control the disastrous inundations of\nthe Yellow River, himself became Emperor after the death of Yao's\nsuccessor Shun, and founded the Hsia dynasty (2205-1766 B.C.).\n\n[15] A quotation from the Book of Poetry, a collection of some 300\nancient ballads said to have been selected and arranged by Confucius\nhimself, and hence raised to the dignity of a \"classic.\"\n\n[16] This must have been said by Confucius after his return from exile,\nwhen many of his followers were dead or in other parts of the Empire.\nCh'en and Ts'ai are particularly mentioned because it was on the road\nbetween these two small states that he met with the most perilous\nadventure of his life, being surrounded by hostile troops and cut off\nfrom all supplies for the space of seven days (see p. 115). It is not\nquite clear whether the next sentence should not be taken as a note\nadded by the compiler, giving the names of those who were with the\nMaster on this journey.\n\n[17] By criticism or questioning. Cf. p. 71.\n\n[18] On hsiao, occurring in another treatise, Mr. Ku Hung-ming has the\nfollowing note: \"The word in the text does not mean merely a filial\nson, but has the meaning of the Latin 'pius'--pious in its full sense,\nreverential to God, dutiful to parents, good, faithful and orderly in\nall the relations of life.\"\n\n[19] \"This prediction was verified. When Confucius returned to Lu from\nWei, he left Tz\u016d Lu and Tz\u016d Kao engaged there in official service.\nTroubles arose. News came to Lu, B.C. 479, that a revolution was in\nprogress in Wei, and when Confucius heard it, he said, 'Ch\u2018ai will come\nhere, but Yu will die,' So it turned out. When Tz\u016d Kao saw that matters\nwere desperate he made his escape, but Tz\u016d Lu would not forsake the\nchief who had treated him well. He threw himself into the m\u00eal\u00e9e and was\nslain.\"--Legge, _Life of Confucius_.\n\n[20] This was the disciple by whoso agency Confucius was finally\nrestored to Lu. But Confucius was the last man to let private\nconsiderations stand in the way when public interests were involved\nand a crying evil had to be redressed. \"Beating the drum\" has no\nreference, as Legge thinks, to \"the practice of executing criminals in\nthe market-place.\" It was simply the recognised signal in warfare for\nadvancing to the attack, gongs being used to sound the retreat.\n\n[21] A member of the ambitious family which was scheming to get the\nwhole power of the dukedom into its own hands. The two disciples here\nmentioned had recently been enlisted in its service, and Chi Tz\u016d-jan is\nanxious to find out how far they can be relied upon in case of need.\nConfucius sees through his nefarious designs.\n\n\n\n\nCONFUCIUS ON HIMSELF\n\nThe Master: I will not be grieved that other men do not know me: I will\nbe grieved that I do not know other men.\n\nAt fifteen, my mind was bent on learning. At thirty, I stood firm. At\nforty, I was free from delusions. At fifty, I understood the laws of\nProvidence. At sixty, my ears were attentive to the truth. At seventy,\nI could follow the promptings of my heart without overstepping the mean.\n\nTz\u016d Kung was for doing away with the customary sacrifice of a sheep on\nthe first day of the month. The Master said: Ah, Tz\u2018\u016d, you grudge the\nloss of a sheep, but I grudge the loss of a ceremony.\n\nThe Master said: In any hamlet of a dozen houses you will surely find\nmen as honest and conscientious as myself, though they may not be so\ndevoted to ethical study.\n\nThe Master having gone to visit Nan Tz\u016d,[1] Tz\u016d Lu was displeased.\nThereupon Confucius swore a solemn oath, saying: In whatsoever I have\nsinned, may I be abominable in the sight of God!\n\nThe Master said: My function is to indicate rather than to originate.\nRegarding antiquity as I do with trust and affection, I would venture\nto compare myself with our ancient patriarch P\u2018\u00eang Tsu.[2]\n\nThe unpretentious hiving of wisdom, patient self-cultivation, and\nuntiring instruction of others--to which of these can I make any claim?\n\nThe failure to cultivate virtue, the failure to examine and analyse\nwhat I have learnt, the inability to move towards righteousness after\nbeing shown the way, the inability to correct my faults--these are the\ncauses of my grief.\n\nAlas! what a falling-off is here! Long is it since I dreamt of Chou\nKung.[3]\n\nThere is no one, from the man who brings me dried meat as payment\nupwards, to whom I have refused my instruction.\n\nI do not expound my teaching to any who are not eager to learn; I do\nnot help out any one who is not anxious to explain himself; if, after\nbeing shown one corner of a subject, a man cannot go on to discover the\nother three, I do not repeat the lesson.\n\nIf the pursuit of riches were a commendable pursuit, I would join in\nit, even if I had to become a chariot-driver for the purpose. But\nseeing that it is not a commendable pursuit, I engage in those which\nare more to my taste.[4]\n\nThe Duke of Sh\u00ea questioned Tz\u016d Lu about Confucius. Tz\u016d Lu made no\nreply. The Master said to him afterwards: Why did you not say: \"He\nis a man whose zeal for self-improvement is such that he forgets to\neat; whose happiness in this pursuit is so great that he forgets his\ntroubles and does not perceive old age stealing upon him\"?\n\nThe Master said: In me, knowledge is not innate. I am but one who loves\nantiquity, and is earnest in the study of it.\n\nIf I am walking with two other men, each of them will serve as my\nteacher. I will pick out the good points of the one and imitate them,\nand the bad points of the other and correct them in myself.\n\nMy disciples, do you think that I have any secrets? I have no secrets\nfrom you. It is my way to do nothing without communicating it to you,\nmy disciples.\n\nThere are men, I daresay, who act rightly without knowing the reason\nwhy, but I am not one of them. Having heard much, I sift out the good\nand practise it; having seen much, I retain it in my memory. This is\nthe second order of wisdom.[5]\n\nIn literary accomplishments I am perhaps equal to other men; but I have\nnot yet succeeded in exhibiting the conduct of the princely man in my\nown person.\n\nTo divine wisdom and perfect virtue I can lay no claim. All that can\nbe said of me is that I never falter in the course which I pursue\nand am unwearying in my instruction of others--this and nothing\nmore.--Kung-hsi Hua said: But those are just the qualities that we,\nyour disciples, are unable to acquire.\n\nThe Master being grievously sick, Tz\u016d Lu proposed the offering up of\na prayer.--Is there a precedent for this? asked the Master.--Tz\u016d Lu\nreplied: There is. In the Eulogies[6] it is written: \"We pray unto you,\nO spirits of Heaven and Earth.\"--The Master said: My prayers began long\nago.[7]\n\nThe Master was passing through a by-street when a man of the district\nshouted: Great is Confucius the philosopher! Yet for all his wide\nlearning, he has nothing which can bring him fame.--On hearing this,\nthe Master turned to his disciples and said: What shall I take up?\nShall I take up charioteering or shall I take up archery? I will take\nup charioteering!\n\nThe Master said: The ancient rites prescribe linen as the material for\na ceremonial cap, but nowadays silk is used as being more economical.\nIn this matter I fall in with the general custom. According to the\nancient rites, the Prince is to be saluted from below the dais, but\nnowadays the salutation takes place above. This is presumptuous, and\ntherefore, though infringing thereby the general custom, I adopt the\nhumbler position.[8]\n\nA high officer asked Tz\u016d Kung, saying: Surely your Master is a divine\nProphet? What a variety of accomplishments he seems to possess!--Tz\u016d\nKung replied: Truly he must be a Prophet, so richly has he been endowed\nby God. And he has also perfected himself in various arts.--The Master,\nbeing told of this, said: Does His Excellency really know me now for\nwhat I am? Being of low condition as a boy, I did become skilled in\nvarious arts--but these are base accomplishments after all. If asked\nwhether the higher type of man has many such accomplishments, I should\nsay, Not many.[9]\n\nThe Master said: Am I possessed of true knowledge? Not so. But if an\nignorant fellow from the lower class comes to me with a question, I\nwill discuss the subject from end to end, and set it fully before him.\n\nTz\u016d Kung said to Confucius: If you had a lovely jewel, would you hide\nit away in a casket, or would you try to sell it for a good price?--\nThe Master replied: Oh, certainly I would sell it, but I would wait\nuntil a price was offered.[10]\n\nThe Master said: Out of doors, to tender faithful service to prince and\nministers; at home, to be duteous towards father and elder brothers;\nto observe the rites of mourning with the utmost care; to avoid being\novercome with wine:--which of these virtues have I?\n\nIn matters pertaining to ceremonies and music, the ancients were more\nor less uncivilised in comparison with the refinement of a later age.\nNevertheless, in practice I take the earlier period as my guide.[11]\n\nAs an arbiter in litigation I am no better than other men. But surely\nthe grand object to achieve is that there shall be no litigation at\nall.[12]\n\nWei-sheng Mou,[13] addressing Confucius, said: Ch\u2018iu, why is it you\nkeep hopping about thus from place to place? Is it not in order to\nshow off your fine rhetoric?--Confucius replied: I do not allow myself\nto indulge in fine rhetoric; no, it is because I consider obstinacy a\nfault.[14]\n\nThe Master said: There are none who know me for what I am.--Tz\u016d Kung\nsaid: How is it, Sir, that none know you?--The Master replied: I make\nno complaint against Heaven, neither do I blame my fellow-men. In the\nstudy of virtue I begin at the bottom and tend upwards.[15] Surely\nHeaven knows me for what I am.\n\nTz\u2018\u016d, do you look upon me as a man who has studied and retained a\nmass of various knowledge?--I do, he replied. Am I wrong?--You are\nwrong, said the Master. All my knowledge is strung on one connecting\nthread.[16]\n\nI used to spend whole days without food and whole nights without sleep,\nin order to meditate.\n\nBut I made no progress. Study, I found, was better.\n\nPi Hsi[17] sent an invitation to Confucius, and the Master wished to\ngo. Tz\u016d Lu, however, said: Once upon a time, Sir, I heard you say\nthat the nobler sort of man would not enter into intimacy with one\nwho laid himself out to do wrong. Now Pi Hsi has raised the standard\nof rebellion in Chung-mou. How can you think of going thither?--True,\nreplied the Master. Those were my words. But is there not a saying:\n\"The hard may be rubbed without losing its substance; the white may be\nsteeped without losing its purity\"? Am I then a bitter gourd--fit only\nto be hung up and not eaten?\n\n\n\n\n[1] The wife of the Duke of Wei, notorious for her intrigues, and even\naccused of incest. Needless to say, Chinese commentators are at great\npains to explain away this incident in the life of the sage.\n\n[2] A grandson of the legendary Emperor Chuan Hs\u00fc. He is said to have\nbeen over 800 years old when he disappeared into the west in the\neleventh century B.C. The last words in the text are taken by some to\nmean \"our patriarchs Lao Tz\u016d and P\u2018\u00eang Tsu\"--Lao Tz\u016d being the founder\nof Taoism, who is also, by the way, alleged to have disappeared at an\nadvanced age into the west.\n\n[3] One of the most revered names in Chinese history. The younger\nbrother of Wu Wang, he helped materially by his wise counsels to\nestablish the dynasty of Chou. He drew up a legal code, purified the\nmorals of the people, and devoted himself wholly to the welfare of\nthe State. Confucius in the reforming zeal of his younger days had\nan ardent desire to see the principles and institutions of Chou Kung\nbrought into general practice.\n\n[4] Legge and others (including even Mr. Ku Hung-ming) make the sense\nout to be: \"If there were any prospect of my being successful in the\nsearch for riches, I would not hesitate to pursue them by any means\nin my power.\" Thus translated, the Master's saying is grotesquely at\nvariance with the whole trend of his conduct and the essential spirit\nof his teaching. Curiously enough, too, there is nothing in the Chinese\nitself, so far as I can see, to justify such a startling interpretation.\n\n[5] That is to say, the wisest men are those who act intuitively,\nwithout having to find their way by any conscious mental process.\nConfucius disclaims any such intuitive perception of right and wrong\nin his own case, and confesses that he is obliged to rely largely on\nobjective experience, as acted upon by the critical and receptive\npowers of his mind. The saying has a distinctly Taoist flavour.\n\n[6] It is not known exactly what these were--a collection of prayers, a\nbook of rituals for the dead, or panegyrics on the departed.\n\n[7] Confucius speaks of prayer in the sense made familiar to us by\nColeridge's line: \"He prayeth best who loveth best.\" In this higher\nsense his whole life had been one long prayer, and he refuses any\nmediation between himself and God. Could antagonism to the ritualistic\nspirit be carried much farther than this?\n\n[8] This saying well illustrates the Master's attitude in regard to\nceremonies. He was no stickler for mere outward conformity to rule, so\nlong as the inner meaning of the ceremony was not affected. Now the\nsalutation of the Prince was simply intended to be a way of expressing\nheart-felt loyalty and respect, and it was only because the new\nposition seemed less respectful that Confucius opposed the change.\n\n[9] See note on p. 44.\n\n[10] Question and answer are of course parabolical. The enthusiastic\nyoung disciple thinks that his Master, in taking no steps to obtain\nofficial employment, is guilty of \"hiding his jewel in a casket,\" or,\nas we should say, \"his light under a bushel.\" Confucius, however, had\na great sense of the responsibility of office, and was loth to thrust\nhimself forward uninvited. His chance came at last after fifteen years\nof waiting, when Duke Ting appointed him governor of the town of\nChung-tu.\n\n[11] Another proof, if one were needed, that Confucius' instincts were\nall for simplicity and not elaboration in ceremonies.\n\n[12] Said by Confucius when he was Minister of Justice in Lu.\n\n[13] Evidently an older man, from his use of the personal name, not to\nspeak of his disrespectful tone.\n\n[14] Confucius, like other great men, was not exempt from the usual\nfate of seeing his actions derided and his motives misunderstood. Here\nwe have a gibe thrown at his wandering from state to state, for the\npurpose, it is insinuated, of making a living by his wits. The answer\nis, that to have remained in Lu or any other state where he was plainly\nnot wanted, would have been merely stupid persistency.\n\n[15] This accounts for men taking no notice of him. Most so-called\nsages start with grandiose ideals and high-flown utterances, in order\nto attract attention.\n\n[16] This is rightly considered to be one of the moat important of the\nMaster s sayings, because it gives the clue to his whole philosophy and\nview of life. The \"connecting thread,\" as we learn from another passage\n(see p. 118), is simply the moral life, which consists in being true\nto oneself and good to one's neighbour. Confucius wished to impress\nupon his disciple that he was no mere amasser of knowledge nor lover\nof learning for learning's sake. The one thing necessary, in his eyes,\nwas to be able to lead, in the highest sense of the word, a moral life,\nand this was the real object of all learning, the end and aim of all\nknowledge. Throughout the Analects, as we have already seen, the usual\nword for \"learning\" always means or implies the study of virtue, the\nstriving after self-improvement. Like Socrates, Confucius was purely\na moral philosopher, and would certainly have rejected the sharp\ndistinction we draw nowadays between mental and moral science.\n\n[17] A rebellious official in the Chin State. On more than one occasion\nin his career, Confucius made it plain that he declined to be bound\nby narrow convention or hampered by the fear of what people might say\nof him. To keep clear of bad associates was no doubt an excellent\nprinciple, but Confucius may have seen some justification for Pi Hsi's\ncourse of action, and in any case he was no longer of an age to be\neasily corrupted by evil communications. Knowing that rules were never\nmeant to be so rigid as to admit of no exceptions, he felt it his\nprimary duty to go where he could do good. Cf. the visit to Nan Tz\u016d (p.\n83), the mere idea of which would have horrified an ordinary teacher of\nmorality.\n\n\n\n\nMISCELLANEOUS SAYINGS\n\nThe Master said: To learn, and to practise on occasion what one has\nlearnt--is this not true pleasure? The coming of a friend from a\nfar-off land--is this not true joy?\n\nMake conscientiousness and sincerity your grand object. Have no friends\nnot equal to yourself. If you have done wrong, be not ashamed to make\namends.\n\nObserve the bent of a man's will when his father is alive, and his\nactions after his father is dead. If during the three years of mourning\nhe does not swerve from his father's principles, he may be pronounced a\ntruly filial son.\n\nThe Odes[1] are three hundred in number, but their purport may be\nsummed up in a word:--Have no depraved thoughts.\n\nObserve a man's actions; scrutinise his motives; take note of the\nthings that give him pleasure. How then can he hide from you what he\nreally is?\n\nAcquire new knowledge whilst thinking over the old, and you may become\na teacher of others.\n\nThe higher type of man is not like a vessel which is designed for some\nSpecial use.[2]\n\nStudy without thought is vain; thought without study is perilous.\n\nAbsorption in the study of the supernatural is most harmful.\n\nYu, shall I tell you what true knowledge is? When you know, to know\nthat you know, and when you do not know, to know that you do not\nknow--that is true knowledge.\n\nTz\u016d Chang was studying with a view to official preferment. The Master\nsaid to him: Among the various things you hear said, reserve your\njudgment on those which seem doubtful, and give cautious utterance\nto the rest: then you will seldom fall into error. Among the various\nthings you see done, set aside those which seem dangerous, and\ncautiously put the others into practice: then you will seldom have\noccasion for repentance. If you seldom err in your speech, and seldom\nhave to repent of your actions, official preferment will come of itself.\n\nThe Master said: I do not see how a man without sincerity can be good\nfor anything. How can a cart or carriage be made to go without yoke or\ncross-bar?\n\nTo sacrifice to a spirit with which you have nothing to do, is mere\nservility.\n\nTo shirk your duty when you see it before you, shows want of moral\ncourage.\n\nSome one inquired as to the meaning of the Great Sacrifice. The Master\nsaid: I do not know. He who knew its meaning would find it as easy to\ngovern the Empire as to look upon this (pointing to his palm).[3]\n\nWang-sun Chia[4] asked, saying: What means the adage, \"Better be civil\nto the kitchen-god than to the god of the inner sanctum\"?--The Master\nreplied: The adage is false. He who sins against Heaven can rely on the\nintercession of none.\n\nThe Master said: He who serves his prince with all the proper ceremony\nwill be accounted by men a flatterer.\n\nIt is bootless to discuss accomplished facts, to protest against things\npast remedy, to find fault with things bygone.\n\nHow am I to regard one who has rank without liberality, who performs\nceremonies without reverence, who approaches the rites of mourning\nwithout sorrow?\n\nMen's faults are characteristic.[5] It is by observing a man's faults\nthat one may come to know his virtues.\n\nHaving heard the True Way in the morning what matters it if one should\ncome to die at night?\n\nThe scholar who is bent on studying the principles of virtue, yet is\nashamed of bad clothes and coarse food, is not yet fit to receive\ninstruction.\n\nInstead of being concerned that you have no office, be concerned to\nthink how you may fit yourself for office. Instead of being concerned\nthat you are not known, seek to be worthy of being known.\n\nWhen you see a good man, think of emulating him; when you see a bad\nman, examine your own heart.\n\nThe ancients hesitated to give their thoughts utterance: they were\nafraid that their actions might not be equal to their words.\n\nFew are those who err on the side of self-restraint.[6]\n\nVirtue cannot live in solitude: neighbours are sure to grow up around\nit.[7]\n\nChi W\u00ean Tz\u016d[8] used to reflect thrice before he acted. When told of\nthis, the Master said: Twice would do.\n\nThe Master said: Alas! I have never met a man who could see his own\nfaults and arraign himself at the bar of his own conscience.\n\nTz\u016d Hua having been sent on a mission to the Ch\u2018i State, Jan Ch\u2018iu\nbegged for a gift of grain for his mother. The Master said: Give her a\npeck.--The disciple asking for more, he said:\n\nGive her then a bushel.--But Jan Ch\u2018iu eventually gave her as much as\nfive hundredweight of grain. Then the Master rebuked him, saying: When\nCh\u2018ih went to the Ch\u2018i State, he was conveyed by a team of sleek horses\nand was wearing costly fur garments. Now I have heard that the princely\nman succours the distressed, but will not add to the opulence of the\nwealthy.\n\nY\u00fcan Ss\u016d, having been made governor of a district, was presented with\nnine hundred measures of grain.[9] He declined them. The Master said:\nDo not decline them. May they not be distributed among the villages and\ntownships of your neighbourhood?\n\nThe Master said: Who can go out of a house except by the door? In life,\nwhy not pass likewise through the door of virtue?[10]\n\nYou may speak of higher subjects to those who rise above the average\nlevel of mankind, but not to those who fall below it.\n\nWith coarse food to eat, water to drink, and the bended arm as a\npillow, happiness may still exist. Wealth and rank unrighteously\nobtained seem to me as insubstantial as floating clouds.\n\nThe inhabitants of Hu-hsiang were unconversable people, and when\na young man from those parts came to see Confucius, the disciples\nhesitated to let him in. But the Master said: When a man comes to me, I\naccept him at his best, not at his worst. Why make so much ado? When a\nman washes his hands before paying a visit, and you receive him in that\nclean state, you do not thereby stand surety for his always having been\nclean in the past.\n\nThe Master said: Is virtue then so remote? I have only to show a desire\nfor virtue, and lo! it is here.\n\nThe Master said: Prodigality begets arrogance,[11] parsimony begets\nniggardliness. But it is better to be niggardly than arrogant.\n\nWithout due self-restraint,[12] courtesy becomes oppressive, prudence\ndegenerates into timidity, valour into violence, and candour into\nrudeness.\n\nLove of daring and dread of poverty lead to sedition. The man without\nnatural virtue, if pursued by the hatred of society, will become a\ndesperado.\n\nIf a man is proud and avaricious, though his other qualities may\nembrace all that was fine in the character of Chou Kung, they are not\nworth taking into account.\n\nIt is not easy to find a man who after three years of\nself-cultivation[13] has not reached happiness.\n\nHe who is out of office should not meddle in the government.\n\nHot-headedness without honesty; ignorance without ingenuousness;\nsimplicity without sincerity:--such characters I do not understand.[14]\n\nPursue the study of virtue as though you could never reach your goal,\nand were afraid of losing the ground already gained.\n\nThe Master said: I have not met one whose love of virtue was equal to\nhis love of sensual beauty.\n\nThough in making a mound I should stop when but one more basketful of\nearth would complete it, the fact remains that I _have_ stopped. On the\nother hand, if in levelling it to the ground I advance my work by but\none basketful at a time, the fact remains that I _am_ advancing.[15]\n\nAlas! there are sprouting crops which never come into ear. There are\nothers which, having come into ear, never ripen into grain.\n\nWe ought to have a wholesome respect for our juniors. Who knows\nbut that by-and-by they may prove themselves equal to the men of\nto-day? It is only when they reach the age of forty or fifty without\ndistinguishing themselves that we need no longer be afraid of them.\n\nWords of just admonition cannot fail to command a ready assent. But\npractical reformation is the thing that really matters. Words of kindly\nadvice cannot fail to please the listener. But subsequent meditation on\nthem is the thing that really matters. I can make nothing of the man\nwho is pleased with advice but will not meditate on it, who assents to\nadmonition but does not reform.\n\nA great army may be robbed of its leader, but nothing can rob one poor\nman of his will.\n\nIt is only when the cold season comes that we know the pine and cypress\nto be evergreens.[16] Let a pupil join with you in self-cultivation\nbefore you let him approach the general truths of philosophy, but let\nhim approach these general truths before he is allowed to form his\ncharacter for good. He should have formed his character for good before\nhe is allowed to make exceptions to a general rule.\n\nWhen Yen Y\u00fcan died, the Master said: Alas! God has forsaken me, God has\nforsaken me!\n\nOn the death of Yen Y\u00fcan, the disciples wanted to give him a sumptuous\nfuneral, but the Master said, Better not.[17] Nevertheless, the\ndisciples did give him a sumptuous funeral, whereupon the Master said:\nHui looked upon me as his father, yet I have not been able to treat him\nas my son. The fault is not in me, but in you, my disciples.\n\nChi Lu inquired concerning men's duty to spirits. The Master replied:\nBefore we are able to do our duty by the living, how can we do it by\nthe spirits of the dead?--Chi Lu went on to inquire about death. The\nMaster said: Before we know what life is, how can we know what death\nis?\n\nTz\u016d Chang asked a question about clearness of mental vision. The Master\nsaid: He whose mind is proof against the slow-soaking poison of slander\nand the sharp stings of calumny, may be called clear-sighted, and\nfar-seeing as well.\n\nThe Master said: A man may know the three hundred odes by heart, but\nif he proves himself incapable when given a post in the government, or\ncannot make a speech unaided when sent on a foreign mission, of what\nuse to him is all his learning?\n\nTz\u016d Kung asked, saying: What may be said of a man who is beloved by all\nhis fellow-townsmen?--The Master replied: That is not enough to go\nupon.--What of one who is hated by all his fellow-townsmen?--The Master\nreplied: Neither is that enough to go upon. It would be otherwise if,\namong his fellow-townsmen, the good loved him and the wicked hated him.\n\nThe Master said: A good man must have trained the people for seven\nyears before they are fit to go to war.\n\nTo take an untrained multitude into battle is equivalent to throwing\nthem away.\n\nIn a well-governed country, speak boldly and act boldly. In a country\nwhere lawlessness prevails, let your actions be bold but your speech\ntactful.\n\nIt is harder to be poor without murmuring, than to be rich without\narrogance.\n\nThe men of olden times who studied virtue had only their own\nimprovement in view; those who study it now have an eye to the applause\nof others.\n\nRefusal to instruct one who is competent to learn entails the waste of\na man. Instruction of one who is incompetent to learn entails waste of\nwords. The wise man is he who wastes neither men nor words.\n\nThose whose care extends not far ahead will find their troubles near at\nhand.\n\nHe who requires much from himself and little from others will be secure\nfrom hatred.\n\nIf a man is not in the habit of asking, \"What do you make of this? what\ndo you make of that?\" I can make nothing of him.\n\nHopeless indeed is the case of those who can herd together all day long\nwithout once letting their conversation reach a higher plane,[18] but\nare content to bandy smart and shallow wit.\n\nWhen a man is generally detested, or when he is generally beloved,\ncloser examination is necessary.[19]\n\nIt is the man that is able to develop his virtue, not virtue that\ndevelops the man.[20]\n\nThe real fault is to have faults and not try to amend them.\n\nWhere there is education, there is no distinction of class.\n\nMen who differ in their principles cannot help each other in their\nplans.\n\nIf language is lucid, that is enough.\n\nThere are three errors to be avoided in the presence of a great man.\nThe first is precipitancy--speaking before it is your turn to speak;\nthe second is bashfulness--not speaking when your turn comes; and the\nthird is heedlessness--speaking without observing the countenance of\nthe listener.\n\nThere are three impulses against which the nobler sort of man is on his\nguard. In the period of youth, when the heyday in the blood has not yet\nsubsided, he guards against lustfulness; in the prime of life, when\nthe physical frame is vigorous and strong, he guards against pugnacity;\nin old age, when the vital forces are in their decline, he guards\nagainst the greed of gain.[21]\n\nThe highest class of men are they whose knowledge is innate; next to\nthese are they whose knowledge is acquired by study[22]; after them\ncome those who are dull-witted, yet strive to learn; while those who\nare dull-witted and will make no effort to learn are the lowest of the\npeople.\n\n\"When you see the good, act as though you could never quite come up\nwith it; when you are brought face to face with evil, act as though you\nwere trying the heat of boiling water\":--I have heard some such saying\nas this, and I have seen men live up to it. \"Dwell in retirement,\nin order to work out your aims; practise righteousness, in order to\napprehend the Truth\":--such a saying I have heard, but I have never\nseen a man live up to it.[23]\n\nMen's natures are alike; it is their habits that carry them far apart.\n\nOnly two classes of men never change: the wisest of the wise and the\ndullest of the dull.\n\nSpeaking to Tz\u016d Lu, the Master said: Have you ever heard, Yu, of the\nsix shadows which attend six several virtues?--No, he replied.--Sit\ndown, then, and I will tell you. Love of goodness without the will\nto learn[24] casts the shadow called foolishness. Love of knowledge\nwithout the will to learn casts the shadow called instability. Love of\ntruth without the will to learn casts the shadow called insensibility.\nLove of candour without the will to learn casts the shadow called\nrudeness. Love of daring without the will to learn casts the shadow\ncalled turbulence. Love of firmness without the will to learn casts the\nshadow called eccentricity.\n\nCeremonies, forsooth! Can ceremonies be reduced to a mere matter\nof silken robes and jade ornaments? Music, forsooth! Can music be\nreduced to a mere matter of bells and drums?[25] Men who are grave\nand stern in appearance, but inwardly weak and unprincipled--are they\nnot comparable to the lowest class of humanity--sneaking thieves that\nbreak into houses by night?\n\nYour goody-goody people are the thieves of virtue.\n\nThe Master said: Would that I could do without speaking!--Tz\u016d Kung\nsaid: If our Master never spoke, how could we, his disciples, transmit\nhis doctrines?--The Master replied: Does God speak? The four seasons\nhold on their course, and all things continue to live and grow. Yet,\ntell me, does God speak?\n\nGirls and servants are the most difficult people to handle. If you\ntreat them familiarly, they become disrespectful; if you keep them at a\ndistance, they resent it.\n\n\n\n[1] The rather inappropriate name given by foreigners to the songs or\nballads contained in the _Shih Ching_ or Book of Poetry (see note on p.\n78). Confucius is said to have selected these three hundred odd pieces\nfrom a much larger pre-existing mass of material, but his language here\nhardly strikes us as that likely to be used by a man speaking of his\nown compilation.\n\n[2] That is to say, he is not limited in his functions like a vessel or\nimplement, not \"born\u00e9\" or a man of one idea. Cf. note on p. 71.\n\n[3] Every ceremonial rite being symbolical of some portion of the\nworld's harmony, and the Great Sacrifice being the head and fount as it\nwere of all the rest, it follows that the man who could penetrate its\nprofound symbolism would have the whole system of morals and government\nunrolled before his eyes.\n\n[4] Prime Minister of the Wei State, who suspected Confucius of coming\nto seek office, and took this means of hinting that the real power lay\nwith himself and not with the Duke.\n\n[5] After some hesitation, I have adopted this clever rendering of\nMr. Ku Hung-ming, as being the only one that fits well with the next\nsentence.\n\n[6] A few other renderings of this sentence will illustrate at once the\nelasticity of the Chinese language, and the difficulty of making it\nflow into European moulds.--LEGGE: \"The cautious seldom err.\" WADE: \"It\nseldom happens that a man errs through excess of moderation.\" JENNINGS:\n\"Those who keep within restraints are seldom losers.\" KU HUNG-MING: \"He\nwho wants little seldom goes wrong.\"\n\n[7] I.e. virtue begets virtue.\n\n[8] A member of the great Chi family, who held office in Lu.\n\n[9] The proper allowance for an officer in his station.\n\n[10] As being, in the end, the moat natural and least troublesome route\nto take.\n\n[11] It is impossible to find an exact equivalent for this negative\nexpression \"non-yieldingness,\" \"non-humility.\" But the dominant\nidea is one of _selfishness_, and therefore such renderings as\n\"insubordination\" (Legge), \"frowardnes\" (Wade), \"excess\" (Ku\nHung-ming), are rather wide off the mark.\n\n[12] For note on _li_, see p. 60. Here again it is the inner sense of\nmoral proportion and harmony, which prevents any quality from being\ncarried to excess. Not a translator but has come to grief over this\nword, though Mr. Ku is not so far off with \"judgment.\" That, however,\nmakes of it an intellectual principle rather than what it realty is--a\nmoral sense.\n\n[13] Literally, \"learning.\" See notes on pp. 53 and 91.\n\n[14] The commentators seem right in their explanation, that a man's\ndefects are usually redeemed by certain corresponding qualities; when\neven these are absent, the case is hopeless.\n\n[15] This is the best I can make of a vexed passage. Legge's\ntranslation is poor, but he is right with regard to the lesson\nintended--\"that repeated acquisitions individually small will\nultimately amount to much, and that the learner is never to give over.\"\n\n[16] Men are known in time of adversity.\n\n[17] Because the family was very poor and could ill afford to bear the\nexpense. It is not the least of this great man's titles to fame that he\nresolutely opposed the tide of popular sentiment in this matter, and\ncould see the iniquity of sacrificing the living to the dead, even when\nthe funeral of his dearly beloved disciple was in question. The moral\ncourage of such an attitude in a country like China, where religion\nis largely connected with the propitiation of spirits, can hardly be\noverestimated.\n\n[18] Literally, \"reach righteousness.\"\n\n[19] Before subscribing to the popular judgment. Cf. saying on p. 103.\n\n[20] I.e. mere passivity, as advocated by the Taoists, will not do.\n\n[21] These numerical categories are hardly more than a conventional\nform into which the Chinese are fond of throwing ethical and other\nteaching. Needless to say, they are not to be considered as exhaustive.\n\n[22] Confucius, as we have seen (p. 86), puts himself in this second\nclass.\n\n[23] The difference lies in the _set purpose_ of studying virtue in a\nsystematic way, and not merely doing right when occasion offers.\n\n[24] \"The will to learn\" is a necessarily vague rendering of the\nequally vague original. It means here a desire for moral culture, which\nis nothing else than the development of that inner sense of harmony\nand proportion (_li_) referred to on p. 99. Good instincts, according\nto Confucius, are not enough to produce virtues, unless they are\nsupplemented by careful cultivation of this moral sense.\n\n[25] A magnificent array of vestments and chalices will no more\nconstitute a true ceremony than a number of musical instruments alone,\nwithout the brain of a composer, can produce music. The whole value\nof a ceremony is determined by the state of mind of the person who\nperforms it.\n\n\n\n\nPERSONALIA\n\n\nIn his moments of leisure, the Master's manner was uniformly cheerful\nand smiling.\n\nIf the Master happened to be dining beside one who was in mourning for\nhis parents, he never ate a full meal. He never sang on any day in the\ncourse of which he had been bewailing a death.\n\nThe Master would never talk about prodigies, feats of strength, crime,\nor supernatural beings.[1]\n\nThe Master made four things the subject of his teaching: a knowledge of\nliterature and the arts, conduct, conscientiousness and truthfulness.[2]\n\nThe Master fished with a line but not with a net. When he went out with\nbow and arrow, he only shot at birds on the wing.\n\nIf the Master happened to be with singers, and they sang a piece well,\nhe would get them to repeat it, when he would also join in the song\nhimself.\n\nThe Master was affable, yet grave; stern, but not fierce; attentive in\nhis behaviour, and yet calm.\n\nThe Master seldom spoke of money-making, of the laws of Providence, or\nof moral virtue.[3]\n\nThere were four words of which the Master barred the use: he would have\nno \"shall's,\" no \"must's,\" no \"certainly's,\" no \"I's\".[4]\n\nWhenever the Master saw a person in mourning, or in official robes, or\none who was blind, he would at once rise from his seat, even though the\nother were his junior; or if he passed them in the street, he would\nquicken his step.[5]\n\nOnce when the Master was lying seriously ill, Tz\u016d Lu got the disciples\nto act the part of Ministers of State.[6] In an interval of his\nsickness, Confucius said: What a long time Yu has been keeping up\nthis imposture! In pretending to have ministers attendant on me when\nI have none, whom am I deceiving? Am I deceiving God? But apart from\nthat, is it not better that I should breathe my last in the arms of my\ndisciples, than that I should die in the midst of officials? And after\nall, though I may not be accorded the honour of a public funeral, I am\nnot dying out on the high road.\n\nThe Master wished to settle among the nine eastern tribes. Some one\nsaid: How can you? They are savages.--The Master replied: If a higher\ntype of man dwelt in their midst, how could their savage condition last?\n\nConfucius in his native village was simple and unassuming. He gave the\nimpression of being no great speaker. In the ancestral temple and at\nCourt he spoke fluently, but with a certain reserve.\n\nAt Court, he spoke to the ministers of lower rank with frankness\nand affability. To those of higher rank he spoke quietly, but with\ndecision. In the presence of his Sovereign, he seemed full of awe, but\nat the same time grave and collected.\n\nWhen employed by the Prince in the reception of distinguished visitors,\nhis expression would change, and his legs seemed to bend under him.\nStanding in the presence of the visitors, he saluted them with clasped\nhands, turning about from right to left, and keeping the skirt of his\nrobe properly adjusted, back and front. He then hastened forward with\narms extended like the wings of a bird. When a visitor departed, he\nwould report in that sense to the Prince, saying: \"The visitor is not\nlooking back.\"[7]\n\nWhen he entered the gate of the palace, he seemed to bend his body as\nthough the gate were not large enough to let him pass. He did not stand\nin the middle of the doorway, nor in passing through did he set foot\non the threshold. When he passed the Prince's throne, his expression\nseemed to change, his legs seemed to bend under him, and words seemed\nto fail him. Holding up his robe with both hands, he ascended the dais,\nhis body slightly bent, and holding his breath as though he dared not\nbreathe. When he came out from his audience and had descended the first\nstep, his countenance lost its anxious expression, and he looked serene\nand happy. When he reached the bottom of the steps, he hastened away\nwith his arms outstretched like wings; but when he got back to his\nplace, he still seemed full of awe.\n\nHe carried the Prince's regalia with body slightly bent, as though he\ncould hardly support its weight; he raised it to the height of his\nhead, and lowered it again to the height of his chest. His countenance\nindicated nervousness, and he dragged his feet as though something held\nthem to the ground.\n\nIn offering presents as an ambassador, his appearance was sedate.\n\nAt a private audience, he wore a pleased look.\n\nHe would not eat meat that was clumsily cut, or served without its\nproper sauce. Although there might be an abundance of meat, he never\nlet it exceed in quantity the vegetable food. In wine alone he laid\ndown for himself no particular limit, but he never reached the stage of\nintoxication. He took ginger at every meal. He did not eat much. When\neating, he did not converse; when in bed, he did not speak. Even though\nhe had nothing but coarse rice and vegetable soup, he would always\nreverently offer some to the ancestral spirits.\n\nHe would not sit on a mat[8] that was placed awry.\n\nOn one occasion, Chi K\u2018ang Tz\u016d having sent him some medicine, he bowed\nas he received it, saying: Not being familiar with this drug, I would\nnot venture to try it.\n\nHis stables having been burnt down, the Master on his return from the\nCourt said: Has any one been hurt?--He did not ask about the horses.[9]\n\nIf the Prince sent him a present of cooked meat, he would sit down to\ntaste it on a properly placed mat. If the Prince sent him a present of\nraw meat, he would have it cooked and offer it in sacrifice. If the\nPrince sent him a live animal, he would keep it alive.\n\nWhen the Prince summoned him to his presence, he would go on foot\nwithout waiting for his carriage.\n\nIf any of his friends died who was without a home or relations, he\nwould say: I will see to the funeral.\n\nIn bed, he did not lie like a corpse. In his home life, his manner was\nnot too formal.\n\nAt the sight of a person in mourning, though it might be an intimate\nacquaintance, he would always look grave. On meeting an official in\nuniform, or a blind man, however ragged, he would always show him some\nmark of respect.\n\nWhen a rich banquet was set before him, he would show his appreciation\nin his looks, and rise to return thanks.\n\nHe would change countenance at a thunderclap or a sudden squall of wind.\n\nWhen in his carriage, he would not look behind him, talk rapidly, or\npoint with his finger.[10]\n\nDuke Ling of Wei asked Confucius about the disposition of troops\nin warfare. Confucius answered: I know something about the arts of\npeace,[11] but I have never studied the art of war. And on the morrow\nhe departed. But when he came to the State of Ch\u2018\u00ean, he was cut off\nfrom supplies,[12] and his followers were so enfeebled that they could\nhardly stand. Tz\u016d Lu indignantly sought the Master's presence, saying:\nIs it for the princely man to feel the pinch of privation?--The Master\nreplied: Assuredly privation may come his way, but it is only the\nbaser type of man who under it grows demoralised and reckless.\n\nMien, a blind musician,[13] having called on Confucius, the Master said\nto him when he came to a flight of steps: \"Here are the steps\"; and\nwhen he came to the mat which was spread for him: \"Here is your mat.\"\nWhen all the visitors were seated, the Master told him who they were,\nsaying: So-and-so is sitting here, so-and-so is sitting there. After\nMien had gone, Tz\u016d Chang asked, saying: Is it the proper thing to speak\nthus to a musician?--The Master replied: Assuredly it is right to give\nthis help to a blind man.\n\nThe people of Ch\u2018i sent a band of singing-girls as a present to the\nDuke of Lu, and Chi Huan Tz\u016d accepted the gift. For three days after\nthat no Court was held, and Confucius departed.[14]\n\n\n\n\n[1] Under these circumstances, it is easy to imagine how edified he\nwould be by the modern daily press, which subsists almost entirely on\nthese very topics.\n\n[2] I am unable to improve on this rendering, which is borrowed from\nMr. Ku Hung-ming.\n\n[3] This statement--at least as regards moral virtue (j\u00ean)-- seems\nhopelessly at variance with the evidence of the Analects. Perhaps\nno more is meant than that he was unwilling to dogmatise on such a\ndelicate subject. On p. 72, for instance, he refuses to judge whether\ncertain disciples have true moral virtue or not.\n\n[4] This is Mr. Jennings's interpretation, and it seems to me the\nsimplest and best.\n\n[5] Thus showing, says a commentator, his sympathy with sorrow, his\nrespect for rank, his tenderness for the afflicted. Quickening his pace\nwas also a mark of respect.\n\n[6] Just as though Confucius had his own Court and entourage, like a\nfeudal prince. This probably happened during his exile in some foreign\nstate, where the chance of his obtaining a public funeral would\ndoubtless be proportionate to the display made by his followers.\n\n[7] \"The ways of China, it appears, were much the same anciently as\nnow. A guest turns round and bows repeatedly in leaving, and the host\ncannot return to his place till these salutations are ended.\"--LEGGE.\n\n[8] The Chinese of that date dispensed with chairs, as the Japanese\nhave done up to the present time.\n\n[9] The point is, that in his solicitude for others Confucius never\nthought of his own loss, not that he was indifferent to the suffering\nof animals.\n\n[10] Some of the minute details given above cannot but strike us as\nrather ridiculous. Two points, however, must be borne in mind: (1)\nthat the customs and ceremonial belonging to any one age or country\nwill always at first sight appear strange and laughable to the men of\nany other age and country; (2) that Confucius himself cannot be held\nresponsible for the excessive zeal which prompted admiring disciples to\nportray his personal habits with such embarrassing fidelity. How many\nphilosophers would come equally well through such an ordeal?\n\n[11] Literally, \"dish and platter business,\" i.e. things pertaining to\nsacrificial worship.\n\n[12] By order of the Duke.\n\n[13] Blind men and musicians were almost convertible terms in ancient\nChina: that is to say, all musicians were blind, and the majority of\nblind men took to music for a profession.\n\n[14] The famous episode hero briefly related was the turning-point of\nthe sage's career. Through the weakness of his prince and the jealousy\nof the rival minister Chi Huan Tz\u016d, he was suddenly dislodged from\nthe pinnacle of his fame and condemned to thirteen years of homeless\nwandering.\n\n\n\n\nCONFUCIUS AS SEEN BY OTHERS\n\n\nTz\u016d Ch\u2018in asked Tz\u016d Kung, saying: Whenever our Master comes to\nany new country, he is sure to find out all about its method of\ngovernment. Does he seek this information himself, or is it voluntarily\nproffered?--Tz\u016d Kung replied: Our Master gains his information because\nhe is so genial and good, so full of deference, modesty and regard for\nothers. In seeking information, how differently does he behave from\nordinary men!\n\nThe Master having gone up into the Grand Temple, asked questions about\neverything. Some one remarked: Who says that the son of the citizen\nof Tsou has any knowledge of ceremonial observances? He comes to the\nTemple and asks about everything he sees.--Hearing the remark, the\nMaster said: This in itself is a ceremonial observance.\n\nThe prefect of the frontier in the town of I[1] asked to be introduced\nto Confucius, saying: I have never failed to obtain an audience of any\nsage who has visited these parts.--He was thereupon introduced by the\nMaster's followers, and on coming out he said: My sons, why grieve at\nyour Master's fall from power? The Empire has long been lying in evil\nways, but now God is going to make Confucius his herald to rouse the\nland.[2]\n\nThe Master said: Sh\u00ean, a single principle runs through all my\nteaching.[3]--Ts\u00eang Tz\u016d answered, Yes.--When the Master had gone out,\nthe disciples asked, saying: What principle does he mean?--Ts\u00eang Tz\u016d\nsaid: Our Master's teaching simply amounts to this: loyalty to oneself\nand charity to one's neighbour.[4]\n\nYen Y\u00fcan heaved a deep sigh and said: The more I look at our Master's\nteaching, the higher it seems. The more I test it, the more reliable\nit appears. I am gazing at it in front of me, when lo! it is suddenly\nbehind me. Our Master knows how to draw men after him by regular steps.\nHe broadens our outlook by means of polite learning, and restrains our\nimpulses by means of inward self-control. Even if I wished to stop, I\ncould not do so; yet after I have exhausted all my efforts in pursuit\nof the goal, there still remains something inaccessible rising up\nbeyond; and though I would fain make towards it, I cannot find the way.\n\nTz\u016d Lu once passed the night in Shih-men, where the gate-keeper said\nto him: Where do you come from?--Tz\u016d Lu replied: From the school of\nConfucius.--Oh, is he not the man, said the other, who is trying to do\nwhat he knows to be impossible?[5]\n\nCh\u2018\u00ean K\u2018ang asked Po Yu,[6] saying: Have you ever received any secret\nteaching from your father?--He replied: No. But once, when I was\npassing hurriedly through our hall, I met my father standing alone, and\nhe said: Have you studied the Odes?--I replied, Not yet.--He said: If\nyou do not study the Odes, you will have no conversation.--Thereupon\nI withdrew and studied the Odes. Another day I met him again standing\nalone as I hastened through the hall, and he said: Have you studied the\nBook of Rites?[7]--I replied: Not yet.--He said: If you do not study\nthe Book of Rites, you will have no stability of character.--I withdrew\nand studied the Book of Rites. These are the two pieces of instruction\nI have received.--Ch\u2018\u00ean K\u2018ang went away rejoicing and said: I asked\nabout one thing and have learned three--something thing about the\nOdes, something about the Rites, and also that the higher type of man\nhas no secrets even with his own son.\n\nYang Huo wished to have an interview with Confucius, but Confucius\nwould not go to see him. He therefore sent Confucius a sucking-pig\nas a present.[8] Confucius, however, chose a time when the other was\nout, to go and pay his respects. But he happened to fall in with him\non the road. Thereupon Yang Huo addressed Confucius, saying: Come with\nme. I have something to say to you. Can he be called truly benevolent,\nwho hugs his jewel to his bosom and allows his country to drift into\nconfusion?--He cannot, was the reply.--Can he be called truly wise, who\nwishes to engage in public affairs, yet loses several opportunities of\ndoing so?--He cannot.--Well, rejoined Yang Huo, the days and months\nare fleeting by, and the years will not wait for us.--True, replied\nConfucius; I will presently take office.[9]\n\nThe eccentric Chieh Y\u00fc[10] of the Ch\u2018u State passed Confucius'\ncarriage, singing: O ph\u0153nix! O ph\u0153nix! How has thy virtue fallen!\nThe past need no longer be a subject of reproof, but against the future\nit is still possible to provide. Desist, desist! Great is the danger\nof those who now engage in government.--Confucius alighted, wishing to\nspeak with him, but Chieh Yu hastened rapidly away, and he was unable\nto get speech of him.\n\nCh\u2018ang Ch\u00fc and Chieh Ni[11] were working together in the fields\nwhen Confucius passed by and sent Tz\u016d Lu to ascertain from them the\nwhereabouts of the ford. Ch\u2018ang Ch\u00fc asked: Who is that man holding\nthe reins?--That is Confucius, replied Tz\u016d Lu.--Is it Confucius of\nthe Lu State?--Yes.--Then surely _he_ is the man to know where the\nford is.[12]--Tz\u016d Lu then questioned Chieh Ni. Chieh Ni said: Who are\nyou, Sir?--I am Chung Yu.--Are you a disciple of Confucius of the Lu\nState?--He replied: I am.--The whole Empire, said Chieh Ni, is rushing\nhead-long to destruction, and who is there that will reform it? As for\nyou, instead of following a man who withdraws from prince after prince\nin succession, would it not be better to follow a man who has withdrawn\nfrom the world altogether?--And he went on hoeing without a pause. Tz\u016d\nLu went back and reported these remarks, whereupon the Master looked\nsurprised and said: We cannot join the company of birds and beasts. If\nI am not to associate with these men of the ruling class, with whom am\nI to associate?[13] If right principles prevailed in the Empire, then\nindeed there would be no need for me to reform it.\n\nShu-sun Wu-shu,[14] speaking to the ministers at Court, said: Tz\u016d Kung\nis a greater sage than Confucius.--Tz\u016d-fu Ching-po[15] repeated this\nto Tz\u016d Kung, who said: Let me use the simile of a house surrounded by\na wall. My wall rises only to the height of a man's shoulders, so that\nany one can look over and see the excellence of the building within.\nBut my Master's wall is many fathoms in height, so that one who fails\nto find the gate of entry cannot see the beauties of the temple nor\nthe rich apparel of the officiating priests. It may be that only a few\nwill succeed in finding the gate. Need we, then, be surprised at His\nExcellency's remark?\n\nShu-sun Wu-shu was disparaging Confucius. Tz\u016d Kung said: It is no good.\nConfucius is proof against detraction. The wisdom of other men is like\nhills and mountain-peaks, which however high can still be scaled. But\nConfucius is like the sun or the moon, which can never be reached by\nthe foot of man. A man may want to cut himself off from their light,\nbut what harm will that do to the sun or the moon? It only shows very\nplainly that he has no notion of the measurement of capacity.\n\n\n\n[1] This was on the borders of the Wei State, whither Confucius, with\na small band of disciples, was retiring, heavy of heart, after his\ndiscomfiture in Lu.\n\n[2] Literally, \"is going to use him as a bell with a wooden\nclapper\"--this being the instrument used in making announcements or to\ncall the people together. The friendly prefect's prophecy was to be\nfulfilled more wonderfully than ever he could have imagined. Never,\nperhaps, in the history of the human race has one man exerted such an\nenormous influence for good on after generations.\n\n[3] Legge's rendering, \"My doctrine is that of an all-pervading unity,\"\nis quite untenable, and no other translator has followed him here. The\nlogic of the passage obviously requires the meaning given above.\n\n[4] This saying should be compared with those on pp. 91 and 69. It is\ngenerally acclaimed as the best epitome of Confucian teaching, yet\nit was reserved for Mr. Ku Hung-ming, a Chinaman, to give the first\ncorrect translation of it in English. The two important words are\n_chung_ and _shu_, \"conscientiousness\" and \"charity,\" for which see\nnotes on pp. 58 and 69. Legge's version, \"To be true to the principles\nof our nature and the benevolent exercise of them to others,\" though\nponderous, would seem to have hit the true meaning, had he not spoilt\nit by a note to the effect that shu is \"duty-doing on the principle of\nreciprocity.\" It has nothing on earth to do with reciprocity, being\nin fact that disinterested love of one's neighbour which was preached\nfive hundred years later in Palestine. The other precept, embodied in\nthe word chung, is exactly Shakespeare's \"To thine own self be true\"--a\nnoble moral conception for which, obscured as it has been by bungling\ntranslators, Confucius has never yet received full credit.\n\n[5] The age in which Confucius lived was so given over to the forces of\ndisorder, militarism and intrigue, and the chances of a moral reformer\nwere regarded as so hopeless, that it was a common thing for men of\nprinciple to retire from public affairs altogether, and either lead\nthe sequestered life of a hermit or take to some mean employment for a\nliving. The gate-keeper here is said to have been one of this class.\nConfucius, however, was made of sterner stuff, and it may be claimed\nthat he did ultimately, through sheer force of character, succeed in\nachieving the \"impossible.\"\n\n[6] The \"style\" or familiar name of K\u2018ung Li, the only son of Confucius.\n\n[7] _Li_ here is obviously the name of a book, and not \"the rules\nof propriety\" or even \"the arts,\" as Legge and Mr. Ku Hung-ming\nrespectively take it. At the same time, we must be careful not to\nidentify it with the now existing _Li Chi_ or Book of Rites, which did\nnot take shape until a much later period.\n\n[8] Because etiquette would require an acknowledgment of the gift at\nthe donor's house.\n\n[9] This episode is probably to be referred to the year 502 B.C., when\nYang Huo, the nominal subordinate of Chi Huan Tzu (himself of usurping\ntendencies, see Introduction, p. 15), was in open rebellion and seemed\nlikely to become master of the whole state of Lu. He was anxious to\nenlist the prestige of a man like Confucius on his side, but the latter\nsteadily refused to countenance his schemes. In the following year,\nYang Huo was ejected from the state, and gratitude impelled the Duke to\noffer a governorship to Confucius.\n\n[10] Apparently a Taoist, who pinned his faith to Lao Tz\u016d's newly\nenunciated doctrine of inaction.\n\n[11] Also Taoist recluses.\n\n[12] This is said to be a sneer at the restlessness which kept\nConfucius wandering all over the country, so that no place could be\nunfamiliar to him.\n\n[13] The idea is, \"Every man to his own trade. Why should I not then\nbusy myself with government--the subject to which I have devoted my\nlife?\" I do not agree with Legge that the compiler of this chapter\ncould not have been a disciple of the sage. Confucius successfully\nrefutes the _laisser-faire_ argument of the hermit, who would dissuade\nhim from reform on the strange and unsatisfactory ground that the\nworld's affairs were in a thoroughly bad state. To any one but a Taoist\nit would be evident that this was the very time for reform.\n\n[14] A leading member of one of the three great families in the Lu\nState.\n\n[15] A high official.\n\n\n\n\nSAYINGS OF THE DISCIPLES\n\n\nYu Tz\u016d said: It is seldom that good sons and brothers are given to\ninsubordinate conduct. That those who dislike insubordinate conduct\nshould be ready to foment sedition, is something absolutely unknown.\nThe wise man attends to the root; for if this be properly set, virtue\nwill spring from it. And what is the root of all goodness but filial\npiety and fraternal love?\n\nTs\u00eang Tz\u016d said: There are three points on which I daily examine\nmyself:--Have I been conscientious in working for others? Have I been\ntruthful in my intercourse with my friends? Have I practised what I\npreach?\n\nTz\u016d Hsia said: The man who can appreciate moral worth and disengage\nhis mind from sensual passion; who can put forth his utmost strength\nto serve his parents, and lay down his life to serve his prince; who\nspeaks sincerely in his intercourse with friends:--such a man, though\nthe world may call him untaught, has in my opinion received the best\nand highest education.\n\nTz\u016d Kung said: What do you say of the poor man who refuses to flatter,\nand of the rich man who is free from pride?--They are well enough,\nreplied the Master; but better still is the poor man who is cheerful,\nand the rich man who cherishes the inner principle of harmony and\nself-control.--Tz\u016d Kung said: One must \"cut and then carve, chisel and\nthen polish,\" as the Odes have it. Does not this passage illustrate\nwhat you say?--The Master exclaimed: Here is somebody at last with whom\nI can really discuss the Odes. Refer him to any old verse, and he will\nsee its application.[1]\n\nTz\u016d Hsia asked, saying: What is the meaning of the passage:\n\n    \"What dimples in her witching smile!\n    What lovely eyes, clear white and black!\n    Simplicity sets off her ornaments\"?\n\nThe Master replied: You must have a plain background before you can lay\non the colours.--Rules of ceremony then require a background?--Ah!\nexclaimed the Master, Shang always seizes my drift. Here at any rate is\nsome one with whom I can discuss the Odes.[2]\n\nTz\u016d Yu said: Too much fault-finding with princes entails disgrace; with\nfriends, it brings estrangement.\n\nThe Master wanted to employ Ch'i-tiao K'ai in the business of\ngovernment, but the latter said: No, I cannot yet sufficiently trust\nmyself.--The Master was pleased with the reply.\n\nOnce when Yen Y\u00fcan and Chi Lu were standing by, the Master said: Come,\ntell me, each of you, the wish of your hearts.--Tz\u016d Lu said: I should\nlike to have carriages and horses and fine fur garments, and share them\nwith my friends; nor would I mind if they were worn out in this way.--\nYen Y\u00fcan said: My wish is to make no parade of goodness and no display\nof toilsome service rendered.[3]--Tz\u016d Lu then said: I should like, Sir,\nto hear your own wishes. The Master said: To comfort the aged, to win\nthe confidence of my friends, to love and cherish the young.\n\nThe Master said: Yung might well be made a prince.[4] Chung Kung asked\na question about Tz\u016d-sang Po-tz\u016d. The Master replied: He is a good\nman on the whole, though easy-going.--Chung Kung rejoined: Is it not\nexcusable for a man who is strict in his own habits to be easy-going in\ndealing with the people under him? But if he becomes easy-going in his\nown habits as well as in his practice abroad, this is surely too much\nof a good thing.--The Master said: Yung's words are true.\n\nJan Yu asked: Is our Master for or against the Prince of Wei?[5]--Oh,\nsaid Tz\u016d Kung, I will ask him that.--He went in and said: What sort of\nmen were Po I and Shu Ch'i?[6]--They were two ancient worthies, was the\nreply.--Did they ever repine? he asked.--They made perfect virtue their\naim, and they attained it. Why then should they repine?--Tz\u016d Kung went\nout again and said: Our Master is not for the Prince.\n\nTs\u00eang Tz\u016d said: Ability asking instruction of incompetence, abundance\nsitting at the feet of insufficiency, a man of every virtue who thought\nhe had none, solid in character yet making himself out a cypher,\ntrespassed against but never retaliating--such was the humble state of\nmind in which my late friend[7] spent his life.\n\nTs\u00eang Tz\u016d said: If a man can safely be entrusted with the care of a\nyoung orphan prince, or with the government of a large province, and if\nthe approach of a great emergency cannot shake his resolution, is he\nnot a man of the princely type? Of the princely type he is indeed!\n\nThe authorities of Lu were proposing to reconstruct the Long Treasury.\nMin Tz\u016d-ch\u2018ien said: Why not restore it, rather, in the ancient style?\nWhy is it necessary to renovate it altogether?--The Master said: This\nman is no talker, but when he does speak, he speaks to the purpose.\n\nSs\u016d-ma Niu lamenting said: All other men have brothers; I alone have\nnone.--Tz\u016d Hsia said to him: I have heard it said that life and death\nare divine dispensations, that wealth and rank depend on the will\nof God. The higher type of man is unfailingly attentive to his own\nconduct, and shows respect and true courtesy to others. Thus all within\nthe four seas[8] are his brethren. How then should he grieve at having\nno brothers?\n\nChi Tz\u016d-ch\u2018\u00eang[9] said: The higher type of man is possessed of solid\nqualities, and that is all. What has he to do with the ornamental?--Tz\u016d\nKung replied: I am sorry, Sir, to hear you say such a thing about the\nhigher type of man; for a four-horse chariot cannot overtake the spoken\nword.[10] The value of the ornament and the value of the substance are\nclosely connected. Stripped of hair, the hide of a tiger or a leopard\nis very like the hide of a dog or a sheep.\n\nDuke Ai asked Yu Jo, saying: It has been a year of famine. My exchequer\nis Low. What am I to do?--Yu Jo replied: Why not collect tithes?--Why,\nsaid the Duke, with a tax of two-tenths I still have not enough. How am\nI to make one-tenth do?--If the people have plenty, was the reply, how\ncan the Prince alone be in want? But if the people are in want, how can\nthe Prince alone have plenty?[11]\n\nTs\u00eang Tz\u016d said of the higher type of man that his culture tended to\nbring him into communion with friends, and his friendships tended to\nheighten his altruism.\n\nThe disciples of Tz\u016d Hsia asked Tz\u016d Chang about the principles\nwhich should govern friendship. Tz\u016d Chang said: What is Tz\u016d Hsia's\nopinion?--They replied: Tz\u016d Hsia says, Associate with those who come\nup to your standard; reject all those who do not.--This, said Tz\u016d\nChang, is different from what I have been taught. The nobler sort of\nman honours the virtuous and wise, but he admits to his society all\nmen without distinction. He admires the good, but he also pities the\nweaker brethren. Am I a man of great wisdom and goodness?--then who is\nthere among my fellow-men that I will not bear with? Or am I neither\nwise nor good?--then other men will reject me. How can one justify this\nrejection of others?[12]\n\nTz\u016d Hsia said: The inferior type of man always tries to gloss over his\nfaults.\n\nTz\u016d Hsia said: The wise man will gain the confidence of the people\nbefore laying burdens upon them; otherwise, they will consider it\noppression. He will gain the confidence of his sovereign before\ncensuring his actions; otherwise, the latter will consider it mere\nlibel and abuse.\n\nTz\u016d Hsia said: He who does not transgress the larger principles of\nvirtuous conduct may be excused for disregarding the boundary line in\nmatters of smaller import.\n\nTz\u016d Yu said: The followers and disciples of Tz\u016d Hsia are trained\nwell enough in sprinkling and sweeping the floor, in responding and\nanswering questions, in entering and leaving a room. But these are mere\naccessories. Of fundamentals they are totally ignorant. How can this be\nconsidered enough?--Tz\u016d Hsia, hearing of these remarks, said: Ah! Yen\nYu is mistaken. It is not the way of the wise teacher to distinguish\nbetween subjects of first-class importance, which must be taught, and\nsubjects of secondary importance, which may be neglected. He cultivates\nminds just as he would cultivate plants, each species requiring\nseparate treatment. It cannot be the wise man's way to produce\nconfusion and error. He only is inspired who teaches methodically,\nhaving a beginning and an end.\n\nTz\u016d Hsia said: Let the official who has time to spare devote it to\nstudy; let the student who has time to spare devote it to public\naffairs.\n\nTz\u016d Yu said: The rites of mourning should not extend beyond the\nexpression of heartfelt grief.\n\nThe chief of the M\u00eang family having appointed Yang Fu to be Criminal\nJudge, the latter went to Ts\u00eang Tz\u016d for advice. Ts\u00eang Tz\u016d said: Our\nrulers have lost their way, and the people have long been scattered and\ndistracted. When you discover the facts of a crime, be not moved with\njoy but rather with pity and grief.\n\nTz\u016d Kung said: The mistakes of a great and good man are like eclipses\nof the sun and moon: his failing is seen by all, and when he repairs\nit, all look up to him with awe.\n\n\n\n[1] Tz\u016d Kung, who had passed from poverty to affluence, wished to\ndraw attention to his own freedom from the vices characteristic of\neach state, but his Master recommends the pursuit of virtue in a\nmore positive form. The quotation from the Odes merely enforces the\nnecessity of unceasing labour in the matter of self-improvement.\nConfucius was always delighted with an apt illustration from his\nfavourite book.\n\n[2] The Chinese of the above is as usual extremely concise. For several\nturns of phrase I am indebted to Mr. Jennings's translation.\n\n[3] Literally, \"display toil.\" The meaning seems to be that of the\nTacitean phrase \"exprobrare beneficia.\"\n\n[4] Literally, \"one who faces south\"--the customary position for\nroyalty enthroned.\n\n[5] The reigning duke, who had succeeded his grandfather and was now\nopposing his father's attempts to return from exile and secure the\nthrone. See p. 43.\n\n[6] See note on p. 74.\n\n[7] The disciple Yen Hui.\n\n[8] Believed to constitute the boundaries of the habitable earth, like\nHomer's Ocean-river. Hence the phrase is used as a synonym for the\nChinese Empire.\n\n[9] A minister in the Wei State.\n\n[10] A proverb.\n\n[11] A rebuke to the Prince for his greed in a time of distress.\n\n[12] Each pedagogue has seized only one side of the truth. We need not\nreject any of our fellow-men, and yet show discrimination in the choice\nof our associates. See the first saying on p. 53, where Confucius,\nclearer-headed than his disciples, puts the matter in a nutshell.","title":"The Sayings of Confucius: A New Translation of the Greater Part of the Confucian Analects","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":29973}