Front Page Titles (by Subject) BOOK III. * - The Chinese Classics: Vol. 2 The Life and Teachings of Mencius
The Online Library of Liberty
A project of Liberty Fund, Inc.
Search this Title:
Also in the Library:
BOOK III. * - Mencius, The Chinese Classics: Vol. 2 The Life and Teachings of Mencius 
The Chinese Classics: Translated into English with Preliminary Essays and Explanatory Notes by James Legge. Vol. 2 The Life and Teachings of Mencius. (London: N. Trübner, 1875).
Part of: The Chinese Classics
About Liberty Fund:
The text is in the public domain.
Fair use statement:
T‘ĂNG WĂN KUNG. PART I.
2. Mencius discoursed to him how the nature of man is good, and, in speaking, made laudatory appeal to Yaou and Shun.
3. When the heir-son was returning from Ts‘oo, he again saw Mencius, when the latter said to him, “Prince, do you doubt my words? The path is one, and only one.
4. “Ch‘ing Kan said to duke King of Ts‘e, ‘They were men, [and] I am a man;—why should I stand in awe of them?’ Yeu Yuen said, ‘What kind of man was Shun? What kind of man am I? He who exerts himself will also become such as he was.’ Kung-ming E said, ‘King Wăn is my teacher and model;—how should the duke of Chow deceive me [by these words]?’
5. “Now T‘ăng, taking its length with its breadth, will amount to about fifty square le. [Though small,] it may still be made a good kingdom. It is said in the Book of History, ‘If medicine do not distress the patient, it will not cure his sickness.’ ”
II.1. When duke Ting of T‘ăng died, the heir-son said to Jen Yëw, “Formerly, Mencius spoke with me in Sung, and I have never forgotten his words. Now, alas! this great affair [of the death of my father] has happened, and I wish to send you, Sir, to ask Mencius, and then to proceed to the services [connected with it].”
2. Jen Yëw [accordingly] proceeded to Tsow, and consulted Mencius. Mencius said, “Is not this good? The mourning rites for parents are what men feel constrained to do their utmost in. The philosopher Tsăng said, ‘When parents are alive, they should be served according to [the rules of] propriety; when dead, they should be buried, and they should be sacrificed to, according to the same:—this may be called filial piety.’ I have not learned [for myself] the ceremonies to be observed by the feudal princes, but nevertheless I have heard these points:—Three years’ mourning, with the wearing the garment of coarse cloth with its lower edge even, and the eating of thin congee, have been equally prescribed by the three dynasties, and are binding on all, from the son of Heaven to the common people.”
3. Jen Yew reported the execution of his commission, and [the prince] determined that the three years’ mourning should be observed. His uncles and elder cousins, and the body of the officers, did not wish it, and said, “The former rulers of Loo, the State which we honour, have, none of them, observed this mourning, nor have any of our own former rulers observed it. For you to change their practice is improper; and moreover, the History says, ‘In mourning and sacrifice ancestors are to be followed,’ meaning that we have received those things from a [proper] source.”
4. [The prince again] said to Jen Yew, “Hitherto I have not given myself to the pursuit of learning, but have found my pleasure in driving my horses and in sword-exercise. Now my uncles and elder cousins and the body of officers are not satisfied with me. I am afraid I may not be able to carry out [this] great business; do you, Sir, [again go and] ask Mencius for me.” Jen Yëw went again to Tsow, and consulted Mencius, who said, “Yes, but this is not a matter in which he has to look to any one but himself. Confucius said, ‘When a ruler died, his successor entrusted the administration to the prime minister. He sipped the congee, and his face looked very dark. He went to the [proper] place, and wept. Of all the officers and inferior employés there was not one who did not dare not to be sad, when [the prince thus] set them the example. What the superior loves, his inferiors will be found to love still more. The relation between superiors and inferiors is like that between the wind and the grass. The grass must bend when the wind blows upon it.’ The [whole thing] depends on the heir-son.”
5. Jen Yëw returned with this answer to his commission, and the prince said, “Yes; it does indeed depend on me.” For five months he dwelt in the shed, and did not issue an order or a caution. The body of officers and his relatives [said], “He may be pronounced acquainted [with all the ceremonies].” When the time of interment arrived, they came from all quarters to see it, with the deep dejection of his countenance, and the mournfulness of his wailing and weeping. Those who [had come from other States to] condole with him were greatly pleased.
2. Mencius said, “The business of the people must not be remissly attended to. It is said in the Book of Poetry,
3. “The way of the people is this:—Those who have a certain livelihood have a fixed heart, and those who have not a certain livelihood have not a fixed heart. If they have not a fixed heart, there is nothing which they will not do in the way of self-abandonment, of moral deflection, of depravity, and of wild license. When they have thus been involved in crime, to follow them up and punish them is to entrap the people. How can such a thing as entrapping the people be done under the rule of a benevolent man?
4. “Therefore a ruler endowed with talents and virtue will be gravely complaisant and economical, showing a respectful politeness to his ministers, and taking from the people only according to definite regulations.
5. “Yang Hoo said, ‘He who seeks to be rich will not be benevolent; and he who seeks to be benevolent will not be rich.’
6. “[Under] the sovereigns of Hëa, [each farmer received] fifty acres, and contributed [a certain tax]. [Under] those of Yin, [each farmer received] seventy acres, and [eight families] helped [to cultivate the public acres]. Under those of Chow, [each farmer received] a hundred acres, and [the produce] was allotted in shares. In reality what was paid in all these was a tithe. The share system means division; the aid system means mutual dependence.
7. “Lung-tsze said, ‘For regulating the land there is no better system than that of mutual aid, and none worse than that of contributing a certain tax. According to the tax system it was fixed by taking the average of several years. In good years, when the grain lies about in abundance, much might be taken without its being felt to be oppressive, and the actual exaction is small. In bad years, when [the produce] is not sufficient to [repay] the manuring of the fields, this system still requires the taking of the full amount. When he who should be the parent of the people causes the people to wear looks of distress, and, after the whole year’s toil, yet not to be able to nourish their parents, and moreover to set about borrowing to increase [their means of paying the tax], till their old people and children are found lying in the ditches and water-channels:—where [in such a case] is his parental relation to the people?’
8. “As to the system of hereditary salaries, that is already observed in T‘ăng.
9. “It is said in the Book of Poetry,
It is only in the system of mutual aid, that there are the public fields, and from this passage we perceive that even in the Chow dynasty this system has been recognized.
10. “Establish ts‘eang, seu, heoh, and heaou,—[all these educational institutions]—for the instruction [of the people]. The name ts‘eang indicates nourishing; heaou indicates teaching; and seu indicates archery. By the Hea dynasty the name heaou was used; by the Yin dynasty that of seu; and by the Chow dynasty that of ts‘eang. As to the heoh, they belonged equally to the three dynasties, [and by that name]. The object of them all is to illustrate the [duties of the] human relations. When these are [thus] illustrated by superiors, mutual affection will prevail among the smaller people below.
11. “Should a [true] king arise, he will certainly come and take an example [from you], and thus you will be the teacher of the [true] king.
12. “It is said in the Book of Poetry,
That is said with reference to king Wăn. Do you practise those things with vigour, and you will also give a new history to your State.”
13. [The duke afterwards] sent Peih Chen to ask about the nine-squares system of dividing the land. Mencius said to him, “Since your ruler, wishing to put in practice a benevolent government, has made choice of you, and put you into this employment, you must use all your efforts. Benevolent government must commonce with the definition of the boundaries. If the boundaries be not defined correctly, the division of the land into squares will not be equal, and the produce [available for] salaries will not be evenly distributed. On this account, oppressive rulers and impure ministers are sure to neglect the defining of the boundaries. When the boundaries have been defined correctly, the division of the fields and the regulation of the salaries may be determined [by you] sitting [at your ease].
14. “Although the territory of T‘ăng be narrow and small, there must be in it, I apprehend, men of a superior grade, and there must be in it country-men. If there were not men of a superior grade, there would be none to rule the country-men; if there were not country-men, there would be none to support the men of superior grade.
15. “I would ask you, in the [purely] country districts, to observe the nine-squares division, having one square cultivated on the system of mutual aid; and in the central parts of the State, to levy a tenth, to be paid by the cultivators themselves.
16. “From the highest officers downwards, each one must have [his] holy field, consisting of fifty acres.
17. “Let the supernumerary males have [their] twenty-five acres.
18. “On occasions of death, or of removing from one dwelling to another, there will be no quitting the district. In the fields of a district, those who belong to the same nine-squares render all friendly offices to one another in their going out and coming in, aid one another in keeping watch and ward, and sustain one another in sickness. Thus the people will be led to live in affection and harmony.
19. “A square le covers nine squares of land, which nine squares contain nine hundred acres. The central square contains the public fields; and eight families, each having its own hundred acres, cultivate them together. And it is not till the public work is finished that they presume to attend to their private fields. [This is] the way by which the country-men are distinguished [from those of a superior grade].
20. “These are the great outlines [of the system]. Happily to modify and adapt them depends on your ruler and you.”
IV.1. There came from Ts‘oo to T‘ăng one Heu Hing, who gave out that he acted according to the words of Shin-nung. Coming right to his gate, he addressed duke Wăn, saying, “A man of a distant region, I have heard that you, O ruler, are practising a benevolent government, and I wish to receive a site for a house, and to become one of your people.” Duke Wăn gave him a dwelling-place. His disciples, amounting to several tens, all wore clothes of hair-cloth, and made sandals of hemp and wove mats for a living.
2. Ch‘in Sëang, a disciple of Ch‘in Lëang, with his younger brother Sin, with their plough-handles and shares on their backs, came [at the same time] from Sung to T‘ăng, saying, “We have heard that you, O ruler, are putting into practice the government of the [ancient] sages, [showing that] you are likewise a sage: we wish to be the subjects of a sage.”
3. When Ch‘in Seang saw Heu Hing, he was very much pleased with him, and, abandoning all which he had learned, he set about learning from him. Having an interview with Mencius, he repeated to him the words of Heu Hing to this effect:—“The ruler of T‘ăng is indeed a worthy prince, but nevertheless he has not yet heard the [real] ways [of antiquity]. Wise and able rulers should cultivate the ground equally and along with their people, and eat [the fruit of their own labour]. They should prepare their morning and evening meals [themselves], and [at the same time] carry on the business of government. But now [the ruler of] T‘ăng has his granaries, treasuries, and arsenals, which is a distressing of the people to support himself;—how can he be deemed a [real] ruler of talents and virtue?”
4. Mencius said, “Mr Heu, I suppose, sows grain and eats [the produce].” “Yes,” was the reply. “I suppose he [also] weaves cloth, and wears his own manufacture.” “No, he wears clothes of hair-cloth.” “Does he wear a cap?” “He wears a cap.” “What kind of cap?” “A plain cap.” “Is it woven by himself?” “No; he gets it in exchange for grain.” “Why does he not weave it himself?” “That would be injurious to his husbandry.” “Does he cook his food with boilers and earthenware pans, and plough with an iron share?” “Yes.” “Does he make them himself?” “No; he gets them in exchange for grain.”
5. [Mencius then said], “The getting such articles in exchange for grain is not oppressive to the potter and founder; and are the potter and founder oppressive to the husbandman, when they give him their various articles in exchange for grain? Moreover, why does Heu not act the potter and founder, and supply himself with the articles which he uses solely from his own establishment? Why does he go confusedly dealing and exchanging with the handicraftsmen? Why is he so indifferent to the trouble that he takes?” [Ch‘in Seang replied], “The business of the handicraftsmen can by no means be carried on along with that of husbandry.”
6. [Mencius resumed], “Then is it the government of all under heaven which alone can be carried on along with the business of husbandry? Great men have their proper business, and little men have theirs. Moreover, in the case of any single individual, [whatever articles he can require are] ready to his hand, being produced by the various handicraftsmen:—if he must first make them himself for his own use, this would keep all under heaven running about on the roads. Hence there is the saying, ‘Some labour with their minds, and some labour with their strength. Those who labour with their minds govern others, and those who labour with their strength are governed by others. Those who are governed by others support them, and those who govern others are supported by them.’ This is a thing of right universally recognized.
7. “In the time of Yaou, when the world had not yet been perfectly reduced to order, the vast waters, flowing out of their channels, made a universal inundation. Vegetation was luxuriant, and birds and beasts swarmed. The five kinds of grain could not be grown, and the birds and beasts pressed upon men. The paths marked by the feet of beasts and prints of birds crossed one another throughout the Middle States. To Yaou especially this caused anxious sorrow. He called Shun to office, and measures to regulate the disorder were set forth. Shun committed to Yih the direction of the fire to be employed, and he set fire to, and consumed, [the forests and vegetation on] the mountains and [in] the marshes, so that the birds and beasts fled away and hid themselves. Yu separated the nine [streams of the] Ho, cleared the courses of the Tse and the T‘ah, and led them to the sea. He opened a vent for the Joo and the Han, removed the obstructions in the channels of the Hwae and the Sze, and led them to the Këang. When this was done, it became possible for [the people of] the Middle States to [cultivate the ground, and] get food [for themselves]. During that time, Yu was eight years away from his house, thrice passing by his door without entering it. Although he had wished to cultivate the ground, could he have done it?
8. “How-tseih taught the people to sow and reap, cultivating the five kinds of grain; and when these were brought to maturity, the people all enjoyed a comfortable subsistence. [But] to men there belongs the way [in which they should go]; and if they are well fed, warmly clad, and comfortably lodged, without being taught [at the same time], they become almost like the beasts. This also was a subject of anxious solicitude to the sage [Shun]; and he appointed Sëeh to be minister of Instruction, and to teach the relations of humanity!—how, between father and son, there should be affection; between ruler and subject, righteousness; between husband and wife, attention to their separate functions; between old and young, a proper distinction; and between friends, fidelity. Fang-heun said, ‘Encourage them; lead them on; rectify them; straighten them; help them; give them wings; causing them to become masters of their own [nature] for themselves.’ When the sages were exercising their solicitude for the people in this way, had they leisure to cultivate the ground?
9. “What Yaou felt as peculiarly giving him anxiety was the not getting Shun; and what Shun felt as peculiarly giving him anxiety was the not getting Yu and Kaou Yaou. But he whose anxiety is about his hundred acres’ not being properly cultivated is a [mere] husbandman.
10. “The imparting by a man to others of his wealth is called ‘a kindness.’ The teaching others what is good is called ‘an exercise of fidelity.’ The finding a man who shall benefit all under heaven is called ‘benevolence.’ Hence to give the kingdom to another man would be easy; to find a man who shall benefit it is difficult.
11. “Confucius said, ‘Great was Yaou as a ruler! Only Heaven is great, and only Yaou corresponded to it. How vast [was his virtue]! The people could find no name for it. Princely indeed was Shun! How majestic was he, possessing all under heaven, and yet seeming as if it were nothing to him!’ In their governing all under heaven, had Yaou and Shun no subjects with which they occupied their minds? But they did not occupy them with their own cultivation of the ground.
12. “I have heard of men using [the ways of our] great land to change barbarians, but I have not yet heard of any being changed by barbarians. Ch‘in Lëang was a native of Ts‘oo. Pleased with the doctrines of the dukes of Chow and Chung-ne, he came north to the Middle States and learned them. Among the learners of the northern regions, there were perhaps none who excelled him;—he was what you call a scholar of high and distinguished qualities. You and your younger brother followed him for several tens of years, but on his death you forthwith turned the back on him.
13. “Formerly, when Confucius died, after three years had elapsed the disciples put their baggage in order, intending to return to their homes. Having entered to take leave of Tsze-kung, they looked towards one another and wailed, till they all lost their voices. After this they returned to their homes, but Tsze-kung built another house for himself on the altar-ground, where he lived alone for [other] three years, after which he returned home. Subsequently, Tsze-hëa, Tsze-chang, and Tsze-yëw, thinking that Yëw Joh resembled the sage, wished to pay to him the same observances which they had paid to Confucius, and [tried to] force Tsăng-tsze [to join with them]. He said, [however], ‘The thing must not be done. What has been washed in the waters of the Keang and Han, and bleached in the autumn sun:—how glistening it is! Nothing can be added to it.’
14. “Now here is this shrike-tongued barbarian of the south, whose doctrines are not those of the ancient kings. You turn your back on your [former] master, and learn of him;—different you are indeed from Tsăng-tsze.
15. “I have heard of [birds] leaving the dark valleys, and removing to lofty trees, but I have not heard of their descending from lofty trees, and entering the dark valleys.
16. “In the Praise-odes of Loo it is said,
Thus the duke of Chow then smote those [tribes], and you are become a disciple of [one of] them;—the change which you have made is indeed not good.”
17. [Ch‘in Sëang said], “If Heu’s doctrines were followed, there would not be two prices in the market, nor any deceit in the State. Though a lad of five cubits were sent to the market, nobody would impose on him. Linens and silks of the same length would be of the same price. So would it be with [bundles of] hemp and silk, being of the same weight; with the different kinds of grain, being the same in quantity; and with shoes which were of the same size.”
18. [Mencius] replied, “It is in the nature of things to be of unequal quality. Some are twice, some five times, some ten times, some a hundred times, some a thousand times, some ten thousand times as valuable as others. If you reduce them all to the same standard, that would throw all under heaven into confusion. If large shoes and small shoes were of the same price, would people make them? If people were to follow the doctrines of Heu, they would [only] lead on one another to practise deceit;—how can they avail for the government of a State?”
V.1. The Mihist E Che sought, through Seu Peih, to see Mencius. Mencius said, “I indeed wished to see him; but at present I am still unwell. When I am better, I will myself go and see him; he need not come [to me].”
2. Next day, [E Che] again sought to see Mencius, who said, “Yes, to-day I can see him. But if I do not correct [his errors], the [true] principles will not clearly appear; let me first correct him. I have heard that Mr E is a Mihist. Now Mih thinks that in the regulation of the rites of mourning a spare simplicity should be the rule. E thinks [with Mih’s doctrines] to change [the customs of] all under heaven; but how does he [himself] regard them as if they were wrong, and not honour them? Thus when E buried his parents in a sumptuous manner, he was doing them service in a way which [his doctrines] discountenanced.”
3. The disciple Seu informed Mr E of these remarks. E said, “[Even according to] the principles of the learned, the ancients, [though sages, dealt with the people] as if they were loving and cherishing their children. What does this expression mean? To me it sounds that we are to love all without difference of degree, the manifestation of it [simply] beginning with our parents.” Seu reported this reply to Mencius, who said, “Does Mr E really think that a man’s affection for the child of his elder brother is [merely] like his affection for the child of his neighbour? What is to be taken hold of in that [expression] is simply this:—[that the people’s offences are no more than] the guiltlessness of an infant, which, crawling, is about to fall into a well. Moreover, Heaven gives birth to creatures in such a way that they have [only] one root, while Mr E makes them to have two roots;—this is the cause [of his error].
4. “Indeed, in the most ancient times there were some who did not inter their parents, but [simply] took their dead bodies up and threw them into a ditch. Afterwards, when passing by them, [they saw] foxes and wild-cats devouring them, and flies and gnats gnawing at them. The perspiration started out upon their foreheads, and they looked away, because they could not bear the sight. It was not because of [what] other people [might say] that this perspiration flowed. The emotions of their hearts affected their faces and eyes, and so they went home, and returned with baskets and spades, and covered the [bodies]. If this covering them was indeed right, then filial sons and virtuous men must be guided by a certain principle in the burial of their parents.”
5. Seu informed Mr E of what Mencius had said. Mr E seemed lost in thought, and after a little said, “He has instructed me.”
T‘ĂNG WĂN KUNG. PART II.
ChapterI.1. Ch‘in Tae said [to Mencius], “In not [going to] see any of the princes, you seem to me to be standing out on a small point. If now you were once to wait upon them, the result might be so great that you would make one of them king, or, if smaller, you might yet make one of them leader of the [other] princes. And moreover, the History says, ‘By bending only to the extent of one cubit, you make eight cubits straight.’ It appears to me like a thing which might be done.”
2. Mencius said, “Formerly, duke King of Ts‘e, [once] when he was hunting, called the forester to him by a flag. [The forester] would not come, and [the duke] was going to kill him. [With reference to this incident], Confucius said, ‘The resolute officer does not forget [that his end may be] in a ditch or stream; the brave officer does not forget that he may lose his head.’ What was it [in the forester] that Confucius thus approved? He approved his not going [to the duke], when summoned by an article that was not appropriate to him. If one go [to see the princes] without waiting to be called, what can be thought of him?
3. “Moreover, [that sentence,] ‘By bending to the extent of one cubit you make eight cubits straight,’ is spoken with reference to the gain [that may be got]. If gain be the rule, then we may seek it, I suppose, by bending to the extent of eight cubits to make one cubit straight.
4. “Formerly, the minister Chaou Keen made Wăng Lëang act as charioteer to his favourite He, and in the course of a whole day they did not get a single bird. The favourite He reported this result, saying, ‘He is the poorest charioteer in the world.’ Some one informed Wang Lëang of this, who said, ‘I beg to try again.’ By dint of pressing, he got this accorded to him, and in one morning they got ten birds. The favourite He [again] reported the result, saying, ‘He is the best charioteer in the world.’ The minister Keen said, ‘I will make him be the driver of your carriage;’ but when he informed Wang Lëang of this, he refused, saying, ‘I [drove] for him, strictly observing the rules for driving, and in the whole day he did not get one bird. I [drove] for him so as deceitfully to intercept [the birds], and in one morning he got ten. The Book of Poetry says,
I am not accustomed to drive for a mean man. I beg to decline the office.’
5. “[Thus this] charioteer even was ashamed to bend improperly to the will of [such] an archer. Though by bending to it they would have caught birds and animals enow to form a hill, he would not do it. If I were to bend my principles and follow those [princes], of what course would my conduct be? Moreover you are wrong. Never has a man who has bent himself been able to make others straight.”
II.1. King Ch‘un said [to Mencius], “Are not Kung-sun Yen and Chang E really great men? Let them once be angry, and all the princes are afraid; let them live quietly, and the flames of trouble are extinguished throughout the kingdom.”
2. Mencius said, “How can they be regarded as great men? Have you not read the Ritual [usages];—‘At the capping of a young man, his father admonishes him. At the marrying away of a daughter, her mother admonishes her, accompanying her to the door, and cautioning her in these words, “You are going to your home. You must be respectful; you must be cautious. Do not disobey your husband.” ’ [Thus,] to look upon compliance as their correct course is the rule for concubines and wives.
3. “To dwell in the wide house of the world; to stand in the correct position of the world; and to walk in the great path of the world; when he obtains his desire [for office], to practise his principles for the good of the people; and when that desire is disappointed, to practise them alone; to be above the power of riches and honours to make dissipated, of poverty and mean condition to make swerve [from principle], and of power and force to make bend:—these characteristics constitute the great man.”
III.1. Chow Sëaou asked [Mencius], saying, “Did superior men of old time take office?” Mencius said, “They did.” The Record says, “When Confucius was three months without [being employed by] some ruler, he looked disappointed and unhappy. When he passed over the boundary [of a State], he was sure to carry with him his proper gift of introduction.” Kung-ming E said, “Among the ancients, when [an officer] was three months without [being employed by] some ruler, he was condoled with.”
2. [Seaou said,] “Did not this condoling, on being three months unemployed by a ruler, show a too great urgency?”
3. “The loss of his place,” was the reply, “is to an officer like the loss of his State to a prince. It is said in the Book of Rites, ‘The prince ploughs [himself], and is afterwards assisted [by others], in order to supply the milletvessels [for sacrifice]. His wife keeps silk-worms and unwinds their cocoons, to make the robes [used in sacrificing]. If the victims be not perfect, the millet in the vessels not pure, and the robes not complete, he does not presume to sacrifice. And the scholar, who, [out of office], has no [holy] field, also does not sacrifice. The victims for slaughter, the vessels, and the robes, not being all complete, he does not presume to sacrifice, and then he does not presume to feel at ease and happy.’ Is there not in all this sufficient ground for condolence?”
4. [Sëaou again asked], “What was the meaning of [Confucius’] always carrying his proper gift of introduction with him, when he passed over the boundary [of a State]?”
5. “An officer’s being in office,” was the reply, “is like the ploughing of a husbandman. Does a husbandman part with his plough because he goes from one State to another?”
6. [Sëaou] pursued, “The kingdom of Tsin is one, as well as others, of official employments, but I have not heard of any being thus earnest about being in office in it. If there should be this urgency about being in office, why does a superior man make any difficulty about taking it?” [Mencius] replied, “When a son is born, what is desired for him is that he may have a wife; and when a daughter is born, what is desired for her is that she may have a husband. This is the feeling of the parents, and is possessed by all men. [If the young people], without waiting for the orders of the parents and the arrangements of the go-betweens, shall bore holes to steal a sight of each other, or get over the wall to be with each other, then their parents and all other people will despise them. The ancients did indeed always desire to be in office, but they also hated being so by any but the proper way. To go [to see the princes] by any but the proper way is of a class with [young people’s] boring holes.”
IV.1. P‘ăng Kăng asked [Mencius], saying, “Is it not an extravagant procedure to go from one prince to another and live upon them, followed by several tens of carriages and attended by several hundred men?” Mencius replied, “If there be not a proper ground [for taking it], a single bamboo-cup of rice should not be received from a man; if there be such a ground for it, Shun’s receiving from Yaou all under heaven is not to be considered excessive? Do you think it was excessive?”
2. [Kăng] said, “No. [But] for a scholar performing no service to receive his support notwithstanding is improper.”
3. [Mencius] answered, “If you do not have an intercommunication of the productions of labour and an interchange of [men’s] services, so that [one from his] overplus may supply the deficiency of another, then husbandmen will have a superfluity of grain, and women a superfluity of cloth. If you have such an interchange, then cabinet-makers, builders, wheel-wrights, and carriage-builders may all get their food from you. Here is a man, who, at home, is filial, and, abroad, respectful to his elders; and who watches over the principles of the ancient kings to be ready for [the use of] future learners:—and yet he will not be able to get his support from you. How is it that you give honour to the cabinet-makers, and the others I have mentioned, and slight him who practises benevolence and righteousness.”
4. [P‘ăng Kăng] said, “The aim of the cabinet-maker, and others of his class, is [by their trades] to seek for a living;—is it also the aim of the superior man, in his practice of the principles [you mention], to seek for a living?” “What have you to do with his aim?” was the reply. “He renders services to you. He deserves to be supported, and you support him. And [let me ask],—do you remunerate a man for his intention? or do you remunerate him for his service?” [To this Kăng] replied, “I remunerate him for his intention.”
5. [Mencius] said, “There is a man here who breaks your tiles, and draws [unsightly] ornaments on your walls, his purpose being thereby to seek for his living; but will you indeed remunerate him?” “No,” was the reply; and [Mencius then] concluded, “Then, it is not for his purpose that you remunerate a man, but for the work done.”
V.1. Wan Chang said [to Mencius], “Sung is a small State; but [its ruler] is now setting about to practise the [true] royal government, and Ts‘e and Ts‘oo hate and attack him;—what is to be done in the case?”
2. Mencius said, “When T‘ang dwelt in Poh, he adjoined to [the State of] Koh, the earl of which was living in a dissolute state, and neglecting [his proper] sacrifices. T‘ang sent messengers to ask why he did not sacrifice, and when he said that he had no means of supplying the [necessary] victims, T‘ang caused sheep and oxen to be sent to him. The earl, however, ate them, and still continued not to sacrifice. T‘ang again sent messengers to ask him the same question as before, and when he said that he had no means of supplying the vessels of millet, T‘ang sent the people of Poh to go and till the ground for him, while the old and feeble carried their food to them. The earl led his people to intercept those who were thus charged with spirits, cooked rice, millet and paddy, and took their stores from them, killing those who refused to give them up. There was a boy with millet and flesh for the labourers, who was thus killed and robbed. What is said in the Book of History, ‘The earl of Koh behaved as an enemy to the provision-carriers,’ has reference to this.
3. “Because of his murder of this boy, [T‘ang] proceeded to punish him. All within the four seas said, ‘It is not because he desires the riches of the kingdom, but to avenge the common men and women.’
4. “When T‘ang began his work of executing justice, he commenced with Koh; and though he punished eleven [States], he had not an enemy under heaven. When he pursued his work in the east, the rude tribes in the west murmured. So did those in the north, when he pursued it in the south. Their cry was, ‘Why does he make us last?’ The people’s longing for him was like their longing for rain in a time of great drought. The frequenters of the markets stopped not; those engaged in weeding made no change [in their operations]. While he punished their rulers, he consoled the people. [His progress was] like the falling of opportune rain, and the people were delighted. It is said in the Book of History, ‘We have waited for our prince. When our prince comes, we shall escape the misery [under which we suffer].’
5. “There being some who would not become the subjects [of Chow, king Woo] proceeded to punish them on the east. He gave tranquillity to [their people, both] men and women, who [welcomed him] with baskets full of their dark and yellow silks, [saying,] ‘From henceforth [we shall serve] our king of Chow, and be made happy by him.’ So they gave in their adherence as subjects to the great State of Chow. The men of station [of Shang] took baskets full of dark and yellow silks, to meet the men of station [of Chow], and the lower classes of the one met those of the other with bamboo-cups of cooked rice and vessels of congee. [Woo] saved the people from the midst of fire and water, seizing only their oppressors, [and destroying them].
6. “It is said in ‘The Great Declaration:’—‘My military prowess is displayed, and I enter his territories, and will seize the oppressor. My execution and punishment of him shall be displayed, more glorious than the work of T‘ang.’
7. “[Sung] is not practising royal government, as you say among other things about it. If it were practising royal government, all within the four seas would be lifting up their heads, and looking for [its king], wishing to have him for their ruler. Great as Ts‘e and Ts‘oo are, what would there be to fear from them?”
VI.1. Mencius said to Tae Puh-shing, “Do you indeed, Sir, wish your king to be virtuous? Well, I will plainly tell you [how he may be made so]. Suppose that there is here a great officer of Ts‘oo, who wishes his son to learn the speech of Ts‘e, will he employ a man of Ts‘e as his tutor, or a man of Ts‘oo?” “He will employ a man of Ts‘e to teach him,” was the reply, and [Mencius] went on, “If [but] one man of Ts‘e be teaching him, and there be a multitude of men of Ts‘oo shouting out about him, although [his father] beat him every day, wishing him to learn the speech of Ts‘e, it will be impossible for him to do so. [But] in the same way, if he were to be taken and placed for several years in the Chwang [street], or the Yoh [quarter], although [his father] should beat him every day, wishing him to speak the language of Ts‘oo, it would be impossible for him to do so.
2. “You say that Sëeh Keu-chow is a scholar of virtue, and you have got him placed in attendance on the king. If all that are in attendance on the king, old and young, high and low, were Sëeh Keu-chows, whom would the king have to do evil with? [But] if those that are in attendance on the king, old and young, high and low, are all not Sëeh Keu-chows, whom will the king have to do good with? What can one Sëeh Keu-chow do alone for the king of Sung?”
VII.1. Kung-sun Ch‘ow asked [Mencius], saying, “What is the point of righteousness in your not going to see the princes?” Mencius said, “Anciently, if one had not been a minister [in the State], he did not go to see [the ruler].
2. “Twan Kan-muh leaped over a wall to avoid [the prince]; Seeh Lëw shut the door and would not admit him. These two, however, [carried their scrupulosity] to excess. When a prince is urgent, it is not improper to see him.
3. “Yang Ho wished to get Confucius to go to see him, but disliked [that he should be charged himself with] any want of propriety. [As it was the rule, therefore, that] when a great officer sends a gift to a scholar, if the latter be not at home to receive it, he must go and make his acknowledgments at the gate of the other, Yang Ho watched when Confucius was out and sent him a steamed pig. Confucius, in his turn, watched when Ho was out, and went to pay his acknowledgments to him. At that time Yang Ho had taken the initiative;—how could [Confucius] avoid going to see him?
4. “The philosopher Tsăng said, ‘Those who shrug up their shoulders and laugh in a flattering way toil harder than the summer [labourer in the] fields.’ Tsze-loo said, ‘There are those who will talk with people with whom they have no agreement. If you look at their countenances, they are full of blushes, and are not such as I [care to] know.’ By looking at the matter in the light of these remarks, [the spirit] which the superior man nourishes may be known.”
VIII.1. “Tae Ying-che said [to Mencius], “I am not able at present and immediately to do with a tithe [only], and abolish [at the same time] the duties charged at the passes and in the markets. With your leave I will lighten all [the present extraordinary exactions] until next year, and then make an end of them. What do you think of such a course?”
2. Mencius said, “Here is a man who every day appropriates the fowls of his neighbours that stray to his premises. Some one says to him, ‘Such is not the way of a good man,’ and he replies, ‘With your leave I will diminish my appropriations, and will take only one fowl a month, until next year, when I will make an end of the practice altogether.’
3. “If you know that the thing is unrighteous, then put an end to it with all despatch;—why wait till next year?”
IX.1. The disciple Kung-too said [to Mencius], “Master, people beyond [our school] all say that you are fond of disputing. I venture to ask why you are so.” Mencius replied, “How should I be fond of disputing? But I am compelled to do it.
2. “A long period has elapsed since this world [of men] received its being, and there have been [along its history] now a period of good order, and now a period of confusion.
3. “In the time of Yaou, the waters, flowing out of their channels, inundated all through the States, snakes and dragons occupied the country, and the people had no place where they could settle themselves. In the low grounds they made [as it were] nests for themselves, and in the high grounds they made caves. It is said in the Book of History, ‘The vast waters filled me with dread.’ What are called ‘the vast waters’ were those of the [above] great inundation.
4. “[Shun] employed Yu to reduce the waters to order. He dug open the ground [which impeded their flow], and led them to the sea. He drove away the snakes and dragons, and forced them into the grassy marshes. [On this] the waters pursued their course in their channels,—[the waters of] the Këang, the Hwae, the Ho, and the Han. The [natural] difficulties and obstructions being thus removed, and the birds and beasts which had injured the people having disappeared, men found the plains [available for them], and occupied them.
5. “After the death of Yaou and Shun, the principles of [those] sages fell into decay. Oppressive rulers arose one after another, who pulled down the houses [of the people] to make ponds and lakes, so that the people could nowhere rest in quiet, and threw fields out of cultivation to form gardens and parks, so that the people could not get clothes and food. [Afterwards], corrupt speakings and oppressive deeds also became rife; gardens and parks, ponds and lakes, thickets and marshes were numerous; and birds and beasts made their appearance. By the time of Chow, all under heaven was again in a state of great confusion.
6. “The duke of Chow assisted king Woo, and destroyed Chow. He attacked Yen, and in three years put its ruler to death. He drove Fei-lëen to a corner by the sea, and slew him. The States which he extinguished amounted to fifty. He drove far away the tigers, leopards, rhinoceroses, and elephants. All under heaven were greatly pleased. It is said in the Book of History, ‘How great and splendid were the plans of king Wăn! How greatly were they carried out by the energy of king Woo. They are for the help and guidance of us their descendants,—all in principle correct, and deficient in nothing.’
7. “[Again] the world fell into decay, and principles faded away. Perverse speakings and oppressive deeds again became rife. There were instances of ministers who murdered their rulers, and of sons who murdered their fathers.
8. “Confucius was afraid and made the Ch‘un Ts‘ëw. What the Ch‘un Ts‘ëw contains are matters proper to the son of Heaven. On this account Confucius said, ‘It is the Ch‘un Ts‘ew which will make men know me, and it is the Ch‘un Ts‘ëw which will make men condemn me.’
9. “[Once more] sage kings do not arise, and the princes of the States give the reins to their lusts. Unemployed scholars indulge in unreasonable discussions. The words of Yang Choo and Mih Teih fill the kingdom. [If you listen to] people’s discourses throughout it, [you will find that] if they are not the adherents of Yang, they are those of Mih. Yang’s principle is—‘Each one for himself;’ which leaves no [place for duty to] the ruler. Mih’s principle is—‘To love all equally;’ which leaves no place for [the peculiar affection due to] a father. But to acknowledge neither ruler nor father is to be in the state of a beast. Kung-ming E said, ‘In their stalls there are fat beasts, and in their stables there are fat horses, but their people have the look of hunger, and in the fields there are those who have died of famine. This is leading on beasts to devour men.’ If the principles of Yang and Mih are not stopped, and the principles of Confucius are not set forth, then those perverse speakings will delude the people, and stop up [the path of] benevolence and righteousness. When benevolence and righteousness are stopped up, beasts will be led on to devour men, and men will devour one another.
10. “I am alarmed by these things, and address myself to the defence of the principles of the former sages. I oppose Yang and Mih, and drive away their licentious expressions, so that such perverse speakers may not be able to show themselves. When [their errors] spring up in men’s minds, they are hurtful to the conduct of affairs. When they are thus seen in their affairs, they are hurtful to their government. When a sage shall again arise, he will certainly not change [these] my words.
11. “Formerly, Yu repressed the vast waters [of the inundation], and all under the sky was reduced to order. The duke of Chow’s achievements extended to the wild tribes of the east and north, and he drove away all ferocious animals, so that the people enjoyed repose. Confucius completed the Spring and Autumn, and rebellious ministers and villainous sons were struck with terror.
12. “It is said in the Book of Poetry,
These father-deniers and king-deniers would have been smitten by the duke of Chow.
13. “I also wish to rectify men’s hearts, and to put an end to [those] perverse speakings, to oppose their one-sided actions, and banish away their licentious expressions;—and thus carry on the [work of the] three sages. Do I do so because I am fond of disputing? I am constrained to do it.
14. “Whoever can by argument oppose Yang and Mih is a disciple of the sages.”
X.1. K‘wang Chang said [to Mencius], “Is not Mr Ch‘in Chung a man of true self-denying purity? He was living in Woo-ling, and for three days was without food, till he could neither hear nor see. Over a well there grew a plum tree, a fruit of which had been, more than half of it, eaten by worms. He crawled to it, and tried to eat [some of this fruit], when, after swallowing three mouthfuls, he recovered his sight and hearing.”
2. Mencius replied, “Among the scholars of Ts‘e I must regard Chung as the thumb [among the fingers]. But still, how can he be regarded as having that self-denying purity? To carry out the principles which he holds, one must become an earth-worm, for so only can it be done.
3. “Now an earth-worm eats the dry mould above, and drinks the yellow spring below. Was the house in which Mr Chung lives built by a Pih-e? or was it built by a robber like Chih? Was the grain which he eats planted by a Pih-e? or was it planted by a robber like Chih? These are things which cannot be known.”
4. “But,” said [Chang], “what does that matter? He himself weaves sandals of hemp, and his wife twists hempen threads, which they exchange [for other things].”
5. [Mencius] rejoined, “Mr Chung belongs to an ancient and noble family of Ts‘e. His elder brother Tae received from Kah a revenue of 10,000 chung, but he considered his brother’s emolument to be unrighteous, and would not dwell in the place. Avoiding his brother, and leaving his mother, he went and dwelt in Woo-ling. One day afterwards, he returned [to their house], when it happened that some one sent his brother a present of a live goose. He, knitting his brows, said, ‘What are you going to use that cackling thing for?’ By-and-by, his mother killed the goose, and gave him some of it to eat. [Just then] his brother came into the house and said, ‘It’s the flesh of that cackling thing,’ on which he went out, and vomited it.
6. “Thus what his mother gave him he would not eat, but what his wife gives him he eats. He will not dwell in his brother’s house, but he dwells in Woo-ling. How can he in such circumstances complete the style of life which he professes? With such principles as Mr Chung holds, [a man must be] an earth-worm, and then he can carry them out.”
[* ] The title of the book is taken from duke Wăn of T‘ăng, who is prominent in the first three chapters of it. Wăn of course is the honorary or sacrificial title which he received after his death. We have already met with him in confidential intercourse with Mencius, in chapters xiii. to xv. of Book I. Part II., the date of which must be subsequent to that of the chapters in this Book. Chaou K‘e compares the title of this Book with that of the 15th Book of the Analects.
[Ch. I. ]That all men by developing their natural goodness may become equal to the ancient sages. Addressed by Mencius to the heir-son of T‘ăng.
[Par. 1. ] “Heir-son,” and “eldest son” were applied indifferently to the eldest sons, or the declared successors, of the kings and feudal princes during the Chow dynasty. Since the Han dynasty, “heir-son” has been discontinued as a denomination of the eldest son of the emperor, the crown prince. Mencius at this time was in the State of Sung, and some have tried to fix the date of the chapter to bc 317. Ts‘oo had so far extended its territories to the north, that it was there conterminous with T‘ăng; but as the prince would be going to its capital it would not take him much out of his way to go through Sung. Possibly that route was the most convenient for him to take, though the language of the text would seem to be intended to give us the idea that he took it in order that he might see Mencius.
[Par. 2. ] For the full exposition of Mencius’ doctrine of the goodness of human nature, see Book VI.
[Par. 3. ] We must suppose that Mencius had been told that the prince doubted the correctness of what he had said at their former interview; or it may be, the remark here preserved occurred in the course of a conversation, of the previous part of which we have no record. “The way is one and only one” probably means the way of human duty, the course to which Mencius felt that he ought to call all who wished to learn of him.
[Par. 4. ] Mencius here fortifies himself with the opinions of other worthies. Of Ch‘ing Kan we know nothing but what we read here. Whom he intended by “they” we cannot well say. Yen Yuen was the favourite disciple of Confucius. Kung-ming E was a great officer of Loo, a disciple, first, of Tsze-chang, and afterwards of Tsăng-tsze. The remark about king Wăn’s being his model and teacher would seem to have been made by the duke of Chow.
[Par. 5. ] “A good kingdom” is such an one as is described in ch. iii. For the quotation from the Book of History, see the Shoo, IV. viii. Pt I. 8. Mencius would seem to say that his lesson was all the more likely to be beneficial, because it had perplexed and disturbed the prince.
[Ch. II. ]How Mencius advised the prince of T‘ăng to conduct the mourning for his father with every demonstration of grief.
[Par. 1. ] Duke Ting was the father of duke Wăn, the heir-son of last chapter. Ting was his honorary epithet. Jen Yew had been the prince’s tutor.
[Par. 2. ] On children’s feeling constrained to do their utmost in the mourning rites for their parents,—see Ana. XIX. xvii.
The remarks here attributed to Tsăng-tsze were at first addressed by Confucius to another disciple. Tsăng may have appropriated them, so that they came to be regarded as his own; or Mencius here makes a slip of memory. I suppose that Mencius means to say that he could not speak of the mourning rites of the princes from personal observation; but he could speak of the observances which were common to prince and peasant. “The three years’ mourning,”—see Ana. XVII. xxi. “The garment of coarse cloth with the lower edge even” was that appropriate to the mourning for a mother, and less intense than that used in mourning for a father, when the lower edge was all frayed, as if chopped with a hatchet. It would appear, however, that either of the phrases might be used to denote mourning of the deepest kind;—see Ana. IX. ix.
[Par. 3. ] The lords of T‘ăng were descended from Shuh-sëw, one of the sons of king Wăn, but by an inferior wife, while the duke of Chow, the ancestor of Loo, was in the true royal line: and hence all the other States ruled by descendants of king Wăn were supposed to look up to Loo. But we are not to suppose that the early princes of Loo and of T‘ăng had not observed the mourning for three years. The remonstrants were wrong in attributing to them the neglect of later rulers. What “History” or “Record” they refer to we cannot tell. The last clause of the paragraph is not by any means clear. Chaou K‘e mentions a view of it, which I have felt strongly inclined to adopt:—“[The prince] said, ‘I have received my view from a [proper] source.’ ”
[Par. 4. ] In the quotations from Confucius, Mencius has blended different places in the Analects together, or enlarged them to suit his own purpose:—see Ana. XIV. xliii.; XII. xix.
[Par. 5. ] “The shed” was built of boards and straw, outside the centre door of the palace, against the surrounding wall, and this the mourning prince tenanted till the interment,—see the Le Ke, XXII. ii. 16. Choo He, at the close of his notes on this chapter, introduces the following remarks from the commentator Lin Che-k‘e:—“In the time of Mencius, although the rites to the dead had fallen into neglect, yet the three years’ mourning, with the sorrowing heart and afflictive grief, being the expression of what really belongs to man’s mind, had not quite perished. Only, sunk in the slough of manners becoming more and more corrupt, men were losing all their moral nature without being conscious of it. When duke Wăn saw Mencius, and heard him speak of the goodness of man’s nature, and of Yaou and Shun, that was the occasion of moving and bringing forth his better heart; and, on this occasion of the death of his father, he felt sincerely all the stirrings of sorrow and grief. Then, moreover, when his older relatives and his officers wished not to act as he desired, he turned inwards to reprove himself, and lamented his former conduct which made him not be believed in his present course, not presuming to blame his officers and relatives—although we must concede an extraordinary natural excellence and ability to him, yet his energy in learning must not be impeached. Finally, when we consider with what decision he acted at last, and how all, near and far, who saw and heard him, were delighted to acknowledge and admire his conduct, we have an instance of how, when that which belongs to all men’s minds is in the first place exhibited by one, others are brought, without any previous purpose, to the pleased acknowledgment and approval of it:—is not this a proof that it is indeed true that [the nature of man] is good?”
[Ch. III. ]Mencius’ lessons to duke Wăn of T‘ăng for the government of his State. Agriculture and education are the chief points to be attended to. The former indeed is fundamental to prosperity, and a State prosperous by its agriculture is the proplr field for the appliances of education.
[Par. 1. ] We must suppose that the three years of mourning have passed, and that the heir-son has fully taken his position as marquis of T‘ăng, one of his first measures having been to get Mencius to come to his State.
[Par. 2. ] By “the business of the people” we must understand agriculture. The promotion of this required the attention of the government before all other things. That promotion would involve the establishment of the agricultural system of the State on the best principles.
For the lines of poetry, see the She, I. xv. I. 7. They are not much to the point; but the whole ode to which they belong is understood as showing how attention to agriculture was the chief thing required in the kings of Chow.
[Par. 3. ] See I. Pt I. vii. 20. This paragraph shows how essential it was there should be a sure provision for the support of the people, and that therefore their business should not be remissly attended to.
[Par. 4. ] interjects two attributes of the good ruler, which are necessary to his carrying out the government which Mencius had at heart.
[Par. 5. ] This Yang Hoo is the Yang Ho of the Analects, XVII. i. A worthless man, he made the observation given with a bad object; but there was a truth in it, and Mencius adduces it for a good purpose.
[Par. 6. ] By the Hea statutes, every husbandman—head of a family—received 50 acres, and paid the produce of five of them, or one-tenth of the whole, to the government. This was called kung or tribute. Under the Shang dynasty, 630 acres were divided into nine portions of 70 acres each, the central portion belonging to the government, and being cultivated by the united labours of the holders of the other portions. Under the Chow dynasty, in the portions of the State distant from the capital eight husbandmen received each a hundred acres, and the same space in the centre was cultivated by them all together for the government. Yet they all united also in the cultivation of the other portions, and each one family received an equal share of the produce the whole being divided into eight portions. Deducting twenty acres from the government portion which was given to the farmers for building huts on, &c., there remained eighty acres, or ten acres for the cultivation of each of the eight families; that is, in the country parts of the States of Chow the amount of the produce paid to the government was one-tenth. In the more central parts, however, the system of the Hea dynasty was in force. According to the above accounts, the contribution under the Shang dynasty amounted to one-ninth, but there was, no doubt, some assignment of a portion of the public fields to the cultivators, which reduced it to one-tenth.
[Par. 7. ] Nothing certain is known of the Lung who is here introduced, but he was “an ancient worthy.” He gives us an important point of information about the way in which the amount of contribution according to the Hea system was determined, and shows how objectionable the whole system was.
[Par. 8. ] See on I. Pt II. v. 3.
[Par. 9. ] See the She, II. vi. VIII. 3. The quotation is intended to show that the system of cultivation according to the system of mutual aid, which Mencius recommended, though it was fallen in his time into disuse, had at one time obtained under the Chow dynasty.
[Par. 10. ] The pith of Mencius’ advice here is that education should be provided for all, and that it might be provided with advantage, when measures had been taken for the support of all by husbandry. As to the names and characters of the different institutions which he mentions, the discussions are endless. When he speaks of the human relations being illustrated by superiors, it is foreign to the object of the paragraph to suppose that he means the illustration of them in their personal conduct;—he means, I think, the inculcation of them by the institution of those educational establishments.
[Parr. 11, 12 ] show what duke Wăn would be sure to accomplish by following the advice which he had received. See the She, III. i. I. 1.
[Par. 13. ] Peih Chen must have been the minister employed by duke Wăn to organize the agricultural system of the State according to the views of Mencius. He is here sent to the philosopher to get more particular instructions for his guidance. On the nine-squares system of dividing the land, see the note on II. i. V. 2. By defining the boundaries must be meant, I think, the boundaries of each space of nine squares, and not, as Chaou K‘e supposes, the boundaries of the State. How the unequal division of the fields would affect the salaries of officers we have not sufficient information on the subject to enable us to speak exactly. But it is difficult to conceive of the division of the fields of a State on this plan, especially when it had become pretty thickly peopled. The natural irregularities of the surface would be one great obstacle. And we find, below, “the holy field,” and other assignments, which must continually have been requiring new arrangements of the boundaries.
[Par. 14. ] “Men of a superior grade” are men in office, who did not have to earn their bread by the sweat of their brow. All other classes may be supposed to be comprehended under the denomination of country-men.
[Par. 15. ] See the note on par. 6.
[Par. 16. ] These 50 acres were in addition to the hereditary salary alluded to in par. 8. I call them “the holy field,” because Chaou K‘e and Choo He explain the term by which they are called by “pure,” and the produce was intended to supply the means of sacrifice. Other explanations of the term have been proposed.
[Par. 17. ] A family was supposed to consist of the grandfather and grandmother, the husband, wife, and children, the husband being the grandparents’ eldest son. The extra fields were for other sons of the grandparents, and were given to them when they reached the age of sixteen. When they married and became the heads of families themselves, they received the regular allotment of a family. In the mean time they were called “supernumerary males.” Other explanations of this phrase have been proposed.
[Par. 18. ] sets forth various social and moral advantages flowing from the nine-squares division of the land.
[Par. 19. ] Under the Chow dynasty, 100 poo, or paces, made the length or side of a mow, or acre: but the exact length of the pace is not exactly determined. Some will have it that the 50 acres of Hea, the 70 of Shang, and the 100 of Chow were actually of the same dimensions.
[Ch. IV. ]Mencius’ refutation of the doctrine that the ruler ought to labour at husbandry with his own hands. He shows the necessity of a division of labour, and of a lettered class conducting government. The first three paragraphs, it is said, relate how Heu Hing, the heresiarch, and Ch‘in Seang, his follower, sought to undermine the arrangements advised by Mencius for the division of the land. The next eight paragraphs expose the fundamental error of Heu Hing that the ruler must labour at the toils of husbandry equally with the people. From the 12th paragraph to the 16th, Sëang is rebuked for forsaking his master, and taking up with the heresy of Heu Hing. In the last two paragraphs Mencius proceeds, from the evasive replies of Seang, to give the coup de grace to the new pernicious teachings.
[Par. 1. ] All that we know of Heu Hing is from this chapter. He was a native of Ts‘oo, and had evidently got in his seething brain the idea of a new moral world where there would be no longer the marked distinctions of ranks in which society had arranged itself. Shin-nung, “Wonderful husbandman,” is the designation of the second of the five famous emperors of Chinese præ-historic times. He is also called Yen-te, “the Blazing emperor.” He is placed between Fuh-he, and Hwang-te, though separated from the latter by the intervention of seven reigns, making with his own over 500 years. If any faith could be placed in this chronology, it would place him bc 3272. In the appendix to the Yih King he is celebrated as the Father of husbandry. Other traditions make him the Father of medicine also. Those who, like Heu Hing, in the time of Mencius, gave out that they were his followers, had no record of his words or principles, but merely used his name to recommend their own wild notions. “The benevolent government” was the division of the land on the principles described in last chapter. According to par. 4, the “hair-cloth” seems to have been quite an inartificial affair. The sandals, which I have said Hing’s followers “made,” appear to have been manufactured by beating and tying the materials together, and not by any process of weaving. It has been supposed that their manufacture of sandals and mats was only a temporary employment, till lands should be assigned them.
[Par. 2. ] Ch‘in Leang appears in par. 12 to have been a native of Ts‘oo, but to have come to the northern States, and distinguished himself as a scholar. We know nothing more of him, nor do we know anything of Ch‘in Seang and his brother Sin but what we are told in this chapter. The “share,” the invention of which is ascribed to Shin-nung, was of wood;—in Mencius time, as appears in par. 4, it was made of iron.
[Par. 3. ] The object of Heu Hing, in the remarks given here, would be to invalidate Mencius’ doctrine, put forth especially in par. 14 of last chapter, that there must be the ruler and the ruled, and that the former must be supported by the latter.
[Parr. 4, 5. ] Mencius skilfully leads Sëang on here to an admission which is fatal to the doctrine of his new master, that every man ought to do everything for himself.
[Par. 6. ] Mencius reiterates here his doctrine, which indeed had been proved by the admissions of Ch‘in Sëang, that there are two classes, the ruling and the ruled, the former supported by the latter.
[Par. 7. ] seems to carry our thoughts back to a time antecedent even to Yaou. We have presented to us the world—all “under heaven”—in a wild, confused, chaotic state, the attempts to bring which into order had not been attended with any great success, and which was waiting for toe labours of Yu, whom Yaou brought into the field. Mencius did not go, nor ought we to go, beyond Yaou for the founding of the Chinese empire. Then in par. 8 we have How-tseih doing over again the work of Shin-nung, and teaching men husbandry.
In regard to the calamity spoken of in this paragraph, it is to be observed that it is not presented to us as a deluge or sudden accumulation of water, but as arising from the natural river-channels being all choked up, and disordered. For the labours of Shun, Yih, and Yu, see the Shoo, Parts II and III. By the “Middle States” is to be understood the portion of the country which was first occupied by the Chinese settlers. The “nine streams” all belonged to the Ho or Yellow river, and by them Yu led off a large portion of the inundating waters. The Këang is what we now call the Yang-tsze. Choo He observes that of the rivers mentioned as being led into the Këang only the Han flows into that stream, while the Hwae receives the Joo and the Sze, and makes a direct course to the sea. He supposes that there is some error in the text.
[Par. 8. ] How-tseih, which is now received as a kind of proper name, was properly the official designation of K‘e, Shun’s minister of Agriculture. Sëeh was the name of Shun’s minister of Instruction. For these two men and their works, see the Shoo, Part II. The “five kinds of grain” are paddy, millet, sacrificial millet, wheat, and pulse; but each of these terms must be taken as comprehending several varieties under it. “To men there belongs the way [in which they should go]” carries our thoughts to the duties of the five relations of society, which are immediately specified. In my larger volume I have translated the clause by “Men possess a moral nature,” but in the note have suggested whether the original characters may not be translated as the clause at the commencement of ch. iii. 2,—“The way of men is this.” Dr. Plath, in his work which I have referred to in the Preface, insists that this is the only correct meaning, and says that I have made a mistake in rendering by—“Men possess a moral nature.” That rendering, however, or the more literal one which I have now given, is the only one which has the sanction of Chinese critics and commentators. The other which I suggested, and which Dr. Plath vaunts as entirely his, has never occurred to any one of them; and a deeper study of the text has satisfied me that it is inadmissible. This cannot be shown, however, without appealing to the Chinese characters, and the Chinese structure of the whole paragraph. Fang-heun appears in the very first paragraph of the Shoo as the name of the emperor Yaou. The address here given, however, is not found in the Shoo, and it was Shun who appointed Sëeh and gave to him his instructions. Perhaps it was addressed to Shun himself;—only on this supposition can I account for its introduction here.
[Par. 9. ] is an illustration of what is said in par. 6, that “great men have their proper business, and little men theirs.”
[Par. 10. ] Compare Ana. VI. xxviii.
[Par. 11. ] See Ana. VIII. xviii. and xix., which two chapters Mencius blends together, with the omission of some parts and alterations of others.
[Par. 12. ] Observe how here Ts‘oo is excluded from the Middle States, the China proper of the time of Mencius.
[Par. 13. ] On the death of Confucius, his disciples generally remained by his grave for three years, mourning for him as for a father, but without wearing the mourning dress. During all that time Tsze-kung acted as master of the ceremonies, and when the others left, he continued by the grave for another period of three years nominally, but in reality of two years and three months. On Yëw Joh’s resemblance to Confucius, see the Le Ke, II. i. III. 4.
[Par. 15. ] See the She, II. i. Ode V. 1.
[Par. 16. ] See the She, IV. ii. Ode IV. 5. The lines contain an auspice of what the poet hoped would be accomplished by duke He of Loo; but Mencius seems to apply them to the achievements of his ancestor, the duke of Chow.
[Parr. 17, 18. ] I suppose that Ch‘in Sëang made this final attempt to defend the doctrines which he had adopted without well knowing what to say. It is difficult to imagine the wildest dreamer really holding that the question of quality was not to enter at all into the price of things.
“A boy of five cubits” would be a boy of about ten years old, who might easily be imposed upon. See on Ana. VIII. vi.
[Ch. V. ]How Mencius convinced a Mihist of his error that all men were to be loved equally, without difference of degree, by setting forth the feeling out of which grew the rites of burial, especially in the case of one’s parents.
[Par. 1. ] Of Mih and his doctrines I have spoken in the Prolegomena. Mencius thought it was one of the principal missions of his life to expose and beat back his principles.
Of E Che we have no information beyond what we learn from this chapter. From the Tso Chuen we know that there were families of the surname E both in Ts‘e and Choo.
Seu Peih was a disciple of Mencius, with whom E Che seems to have had some acquaintance. Our philosopher, probably, was well enough, but feigned sickness that he might test, by interposing delay, the sincerity of the Mihist’s wish to see him. The same purpose was also served by his saying that he would go to see E Che, when he was better. He did not, indeed, mean to do so; but having been told that he would do it, E Che, if he had not been in earnest, might have given up his desire to have an interview.
[Par. 2. ] E Che showed his sincerity in again seeking so soon after to have an interview with Mencius. Mencius knew that in one point his practice disagreed with the principles of Mih which he professed to follow, and resolved from that point to commence his communications with him. According to Chwang-tsze, Mih all his life-time did not sing, nor did he permit mourning for the dead. He would have no outer coffin, and the inner one which he allowed was to be only three inches in thickness.
[Par. 3. ] Up to this time Mencius had not seen E Che, nor does it appear that he subsequently did so. The intercourse between them was conducted by Seu Peih. E Che does not try to vindicate his sumptuous interment of his parents, but proceeds to state and argue for the notable dogma of his master, that all men are to be loved equally. In support of this he refers to an expression in the Shoo, V. ix. 9, where the prince of K‘ang is exhorted to deal with the people as he would do in protecting his own infant children. Mencius shows that that expression is merely metaphorical, and meant that the people were to be dealt with with a very kindly consideration of their weakness and liability to err. Nature itself, he says, teaches us to regard with peculiar feelings our parents and all related to us by blood. If we were to regard them and all others not related to us in the same way, that would be to make us sprung from two roots,—to be connected equally with our parents and with other men.
[Par. 4. ] Mencius tries to confirm his position by showing the origin of burial rites in the most ancient times, that is, before the sages had delivered their rules on the subject. Even then the natural feelings of men made them bury their parents, and where some neglected to do so, remorse speedily supervened. What affection thus prompted in the first place was prompted similarly in its more sumptuous exhibition in the progress of civilization. If any interment were called for by nature, a handsome one must have our approbation.
[Par. 5. ] E Che was satisfied of the truth of what Mencius had said, and probably ceased to be a Mihist.
[Ch. I. ]How Mencius defended the dignity of reserve, by which he regulated his intercourse with the princes of his time. To understand this chapter, it must be borne in mind that there were many wandering scholars in the days of Mencius,—men who went from court to court, recommending themselves to the various princes, and trying to influence the course of events by their counsels. They would stoop for place and employment. Not so with our philosopher. He required that there should be shown to himself a portion of the respect which was due to the principles of which he was the expounder. Compare chapter vii.
[Par. 1. ] Ch‘in Tae was one of Mencius’ disciples; and this is all that we know of him. “The thing that might be done” was Mencius’ going to wait upon the princes,—taking the initiative in seeking employment from them.
[Par. 2. ] The forester was an officer as old as the time of Shun, who in the Shoo, II. i. 22; appoints Yih, saying that “he could rightly superintend the birds and beasts of the fields and trees on his hills and in his forests.” In the Official Book of Chow, XVII. vi., we have an account of the office and its duties. In those days the various officers had their several tokens, which the prince’s or king’s messenger bore when he was sent to summon any one of them. The forester’s token was a fur cap, and the one in the text could not answer to a summons with a flag. We find the incident mentioned by Mencius given in the Tso Chuen under the 20th year of duke Ch‘aou;—but with variations:—“In the 12th month, the marquis of Ts‘e was hunting in P‘ei, and summoned the forester to him with a bow. The forester did not come forward, and the marquis caused him to be seized, when he explained his conduct, saying, ‘At the huntings of our former rulers, a flag was used to call a great officer, a bow to call an inferior one, and a fur cap to call a forester. Not seeing the fur cap, I did not venture to come forward.’ On this he was let go. Confucius said, ‘To keep the rule [of answering a prince’s summons] is not so good as to keep [the special rule for one’s] office. Superior men will hold this man right.’ ”
[Par. 3. ] This is the decisive paragraph in the conversation.
[Par. 4. ] Këen was the honorary or sacrificial epithet of Chaou Yang, the chief minister of Tsin, in the time of Confucius. He is constantly appearing in the Tso Chuen after the 24th year of duke Ch‘aou; and Wang Leang was his charioteer, who appears in the Tso Chuen and the narratives of the States also as Yëw Lëang, Yew Woo-seuh, Yëw Woo-ching. I have not met with any further reference to Chaou Yang’s favourite He. The ode in the Book of Poetry from which the quotation is made is II. iii. V.
[Ch. II. ]Mencius’ conception of the great man.
[Par. 1. ] King Ch‘un was a contemporary of Mencius, who occupied himself with the intrigues of the time, designed to unite the other States in opposition to Ts‘in or to induce them to submit to it. He was an admirer of Kung-sun Yen and Chang E, two principal leaders in those intrigues, and whose influence was very great on the fortunes of the time. They were both of them natives of Wei, but were generally opposed to each other in their schemes. Yen was a grandson of one of the rulers of Wei, and hence his surname of Kung-sun. He is often mentioned by the designation of Senew;—see the “Historical Records,” Book C. Chang E was perhaps the abler man of the two.
[Par. 2. ] The Ritual usages, to which Mencius here refers, is the collection known by the name of E Le. Our philosopher throws various passages together, and, according to his wont, is not careful to quote correctly. Obedience was the rule for women, and especially so for concubines or secondary wives. Mencius introduces them to show his contempt for Yen and E, who, with all their bluster, only pandered to the passions of the princes.
[Par. 3. ] “The wide house of the world” is benevolence or love, the chief and home of all the virtues; “the correct seat” is propriety; and “the great path” is righteousness.
[Ch. III. ]Office is to be eagerly desired; and yet it should not be sought by any but its proper path. It will be seen that the questioner of Mencius in this chapter wished to condemn him for the dignity of reserve which he maintained in his intercourse with the princes, and which is the subject of the 1st chapter of this Part. Mencius does not evade any of his questions, and defends himself very ingeniously.
[Par. 1. ] Chow Seaou was one of the wandering scholars of Mencius’ time. In the “Plans of the Warring States,” under the division of Wei, of which he was a native, he appears as an opponent of Kung-sun Yen of last chapter. The “Record,” from which Mencius quotes about Confucius, whatever it was, is now lost. Every person waiting on another—a superior—was supposed to pave his way by some introductory gift; and each official rank had its proper article to be used for that purpose by all belonging to it;—see the Le Ke, I. ii. III. 18. Confucius carried his gift with him, that he might not lose any opportunity of being in office again. Kung-ming E,—see on Part I. i.
[Par. 3. ] In his quotations here from the Le Ke, Mencius combines and adapts to his purpose different passages, with more than his usual freedom. Choo He, to illustrate the text, gives his own summary of the same passages thus:—“It is said in the Book of Rites that the feudal princes had their special field of a hundred acres, in which, wearing their crown, with its blue flaps turned up, they held the plough to commence the ploughing, which was afterwards completed with the help of the common people. The produce of this field was reaped and stored in the ducal granary, to supply the vessels of millet in the ancestral temple. They also cause the noble women of their harem to attend to the silkworms in the silkworm house attached to the State mulberry trees, and to bring the cocoons to them. These were then presented to their wives, who received them in their sacrificial head-dress and robe, soaked them, and thrice drew out a thread. The cocoons were then distributed among the ladies of the three palaces to prepare the threads for the ornaments of the robes to be worn in sacrificing to the former kings and dukes.”
The officer’s field is the “holy” field of Pt i. III. 16. The argument is that it was not the loss of office which was a proper subject for grief and condolence, but the consequences of it in not being able, especially, to continue the proper sacrifices;—as here set forth.
[Par. 6. ] By the “superior man” and his making a difficulty in taking office, Sëaou evidently intended Mencius himself, who, however, does not take any notice of the insinuation. The method of contracting marriages here referred to by Mencius still exists, and seems to have been the rule of the Chinese race from time immemorial.
[Ch. IV. ]The labourer is worthy of his hire: and there is no labourer so worthy as the scholar who instructs men in the principles, and guides men in the practice, of virtue.
[Par. 1. ] P‘ăng Kăng was a disciple of Mencius. Whether his own mind was really perplexed as to the character of his master’s way of life, or he simply wished to stir him up to visit the princes and go into office, we cannot tell.
[Parr. 2—5. ] We cannot but admire the ingenuity which Mencius displays here in the turn which he gives to the conversation. And he is right in saying that it is not the purpose which we remunerate, but the work which is done for us. Yet his argument, as a defence of himself and his own practice, fails to carry conviction to the mind. Men in general will give honour to him who holds the principles of benevolence and righteousness, inculcating them, moreover, and exemplifying them; but it does not follow that they are bound to support him, nor can he accept their support without some loss of character.
[Ch. V. ]The prince who will set himself to practise a benevolent government on the principles of the ancient kings has none to fear:—with reference to the case of a duke of Sung who claimed the title of king.
[Par. 1. ] Wan Chang was a disciple of Mencius, the fifth Book of whose Works is named from him. The ruler of Sung to whom reference is made was Yen, who raised himself by violence to the dukedom in bc 328, and in 317 assumed the title of king, when he gained some successes over the States of Ts‘e on the north, of Ts‘oo on the south, and of Wei on the west. He probably gave out at first that he meant to imitate the ancient kings in his government, but he was very far from doing so. In the Historical Records, Book XXXVIII., he appears as a worthless and oppressive ruler, and his ambition, which led him into collision with the great States mentioned above, precipitated the extinction of the dukedom of Sung, which took place in bc 285. Wan Chang gives a too favourable account of him to our philosopher, who, however, was not deceived by it.
[Par. 2. ] Compare I. ii. III. 1, and XI. 2. Poh, the capital of T‘ang’s principality (though there were three places of the same name), is referred to a place in the present district of Shang-k‘ew, in the department of Kwei-tih, Ho-nan; and the capital of the earldom of Koh was in the district of Ning-ling in the same department, so that Mencius might say well enough that Poh adjoined to Koh, and T‘ang might render to the earl of Koh the services which are mentioned. The passage of the Shoo referred to at the end is from IV. ii. 6.
[Par. 3. ] “To avenge the common men and women” is spoken generally, but the words have a special application to the father and mother of the murdered boy.
[Par. 4. ] Compare I. ii. XI. 2; and for the quotations from the Shoo, see IV. ii. 6, and v. Pt II. 5. The eleven punitive expeditions of T‘ang cannot all be made out. In the Shoo and the She we find only six. By a peculiar construction of the text here, Ch‘aou K‘e makes them to have been 22; others have put them down at as many as 27.
[Par. 5. ] The first half of this paragraph is substantially a quotation from the Shoo, V. iii. 7; but that Book of the Shoo is supposed to be imperfect, and to require considerable emendation.
[Par. 6. ] See the Shoo, V. i. Pt II. 6.
[Par. 7. ] Here is the conclusion of the matter. The king of Sung, having taken the sword in a different spirit from T‘ang and Woo, would perish by the sword.
[Ch. VI. ]The all-powerful influence of example and association. The importance of having virtuous men about a ruler’s person. This chapter may be considered as connected with the preceding.
[Par. 1. ] Tae Puh-shing was a minister, probably the chief minister, of Sung, a descendant from one of its dukes, who had received the posthumous epithet of Tae, which had been adopted as their clan-name by a branch of his posterity. Chwang and Yoh were two well-known quarters in the capital of Ts‘e. They are both mentioned in the Tso Chuen under par. 6 of the 28th year of duke Seang. Some will have it that Chwang was the name of a street merely, and Yoh of a neighbourhood.
[Par. 2. ] Sëeh Keu-chow was also a minister of Sung, recommended as tutor or adviser to the king by Tae Puh-shing. He was a man of virtue and acquirements,—a descendant of the lords of Sëeh, which principality dates at least from the time of Yu.
[Ch. VII. ]Mencius defends his not going to see the princes by the example and maxims of the ancients. Akin to the first and other chapters of this Book.
[Par. 1. ] In Ana. XIV. xxii. we have an example of how Confucius, not then actually in office, but having been so, went to see the marquis of Loo. He had a good reason, however, for doing so, independently of his having been in office. Mencius is never altogether satisfactory in vindicating his own conduct in the matters affecting his intercourse with the princes, which staggered the faith of his followers.
[Par. 2. ] Twan Kan-muh, or Twan-kan Muh (the surname and name are not clearly ascertained), was a native of Tsin, and a disciple of Tsze-hea. The prince whom he avoided in the way which Mencius refers to was Sze, the first marquis of Wei, known as duke Wăn, who died in bc 386. He never drove past Twan’s door, it is said, without bowing forward to the front bar of his carriage in token of respect; but Twan stood out upon his purity, and would not go to see him.
Sëeh Lew has been mentioned in II. ii. XI. 3.
[Par. 3. ] See Ana. XVII. i. In the incident which is here related few will see anything more or higher than the ingenuity of Confucius in getting out of a difficulty.
[Par. 4. ] We must understand Tsze-loo as speaking of those men who gave their counsels freely to princes and men of influence of whom they disapproved.
[Ch. VIII. ]What is wrong should be put an end to at once, without reserve, and without delay.
[Par. 1. ] Tae Ying-che was a minister of Sung;—supposed by some to have been the same with the Tae Puh-shing of chapter vi. I think it likely they were the same. We must suppose that Mencius had been talking with him on the points indicated in his remarks, and insisting on them as necessary to the benevolent government, which, it was pretended, was being instituted in Sung. See I. ii. V. 3; II. i. V. 3; and III. i. III.
[Ch. IX. ]Mencius defends himself against the charge of being fond of disputing. What led to his appearing to be so was the necessity of the time. Compare II. i. II. It would appear from that chapter and this that our philosopher believed that the mantle of Confucius had fallen upon him, and that he was in the position of a sage on whom it devolved to live and labour for the world.
[Par. 1. ] Kung-too,—see II. ii. V. 4. There was some truth, no doubt, in the common opinion about Mencius reported to him by Kung-too.
[Parr. 2, 3. ] Commentators are unanimous in understanding Mencius to be speaking here not of the material world, but of the first appearance of men; and it is remarkable that in his review of the history of mankind, he does not go beyond the time of Yaou, and that at its commencement he places a period of disorder. Compare Pt i. IV. 7. The “nests” were huts on high-raised platforms. In the Le Ke, IX. i. 8, it is said that these were the summer habitations of the earliest men, who made caves for themselves in the winter, and lived in them. For the words of the Shoo, see that work, II. iii. 14.
[Par. 4. ] “The waters pursued their course in their channels;”—or, it may be, “the waters pursued their course through the country,” that is, no more overflowed it.
[Par. 5. ] The dynasties of Hea and Shang have their history summed up here in very small compass. Yu and T‘ang, and various worthy, if not sage, sovereigns are passed over without ceremony. Does not the account thus given imply that down to the rise of the Chow dynasty the country was very thinly peopled?
[Par. 6. ] Yen was a State in the present district of K‘ëuh-fow, department Yen-chow, Shan-tung. From the specification of it here, it must have been of considerable note and influence. Fei-lëen was a favourite minister of Chow, who abetted him in his enormities. It would be vain to try to enumerate the “fifty States,” which the duke of Chow is said to have extinguished. “The tigers,” &c., spoken of here, are said to have been those kept by the tyrant Chow, and those infesting the country, as in earlier times. The text of Mencius, however, produces a different impression on my mind. He would have us think of much of the country as being, even in the time of the duke of Chow, still over-run by wild animals. See the Shoo, V. xxv. 6.
[Parr. 7, 8. ] What Mencius says here about the “Spring and Autumn” is very perplexing, and the reader will find the passages discussed at length in the first chapter of my Prolegomena to Vol. V. of my larger work. It is difficult to believe that our philosopher can be speaking of the “Spring and Autumn,” which we now have; and yet the evidence seems complete that the present classic of that name is what came from the stylus of the sage.
[Par. 9. ] From Confucius to Mencius was but a short time compared with that which intervened between Confucius and the duke of Chow, and that again between the duke of Chow and Yaou and Shun. The process of decay was going on with unexampled rapidity. Of Yang Choo, as well as of Mih Teih, and of the principles of them both, I have spoken in the Prolegomena. See the words here attributed to Kung-ming E in I. i. IV. 4.
[Par. 10. ] Compare II. i. II. 17.
[Par. 11. ] The way in which the duke of Chow’s driving away “all ferocious animals” is here mentioned seems inconsistent with the view of the expression of which I have spoken under par. 6.
[Par. 12. ] See on Pt i. IV. 16.
[Par. 13. ] Compare II. i. II. 17.
[Par. 14. ] Mencius seems here to call on all disciples of Confucius to co-operate with him in upholding the doctrines of the sage, and yet the sentence was perhaps intended to take away from the forcible assertion to which he had given utterance, and by which he claimed for himself a place in the line of sages.
[Ch. X. ]The man who will avoid all association with, and obligation to, those of whom he does not approve must needs go out of the world—Illustrated by the case of Ch‘in Chung of Ts‘e.
[Par. 1. ] K‘wang Chang and Ch‘in Chung (called also Ch‘in Tsze-chung) were both natives of Ts‘e. The former was high in the confidence and employment of the kings Wei and Seuen, and did good service to the State on more than one occasion;—see on IV. ii. xxx. The latter, as we learn from this chapter, belonged to an old and noble family of the State. His principles appear to have been those of Heu Hing, mentioned in Pt i. IV., or even more severe. We may compare him with the recluses of Confucius’ time. Woo-ling was a poor, wild place, where Chung and his wife, likeminded with himself, lived in retirement. It was somewhere in the present department of Tse-nan. Chaou K‘e thinks that it is said the plum was half-eaten, to show how Mr Chung had really all but lost his eye-sight.
[Par. 2. ] Mencius’ idea is that Ch‘in Chung’s principles were altogether impracticable.
[Par. 3. ] Pih-e,—see II. i. II. 22, et al. Chih was a famous robber chief of Confucius’ time, a younger brother of Hwuy of Lew-hea, celebrated by Mencius in II. i. IX. 2, et al. There was, however, it is said, in high antiquity in the time of Hwang-te, a noted robber so called, whose name was given to Hwuy’s brother because of the similarity of their course. “The robber Chih” had come to be used like a proper name.—As Chung withdrew from human society lest he should be defiled by it, Mencius shows that unless he were a worm, he could not be independent of other men. Even the house he lived in, and the grain he ate, might be the result of the labour of a villain like Chih, or of a worthy like Pih-e, for anything he could tell.
[Parr. 4, 5. ] K‘wang Chang says that the lodging and food of Mr Ch‘in were innocently and righteously come by; and it was not necessary to push one’s inquiries further back. Mencius does not reply to him directly, but throws ridicule on the self-denying recluse by the ridiculous story which he tells; and concludes by reiterating what he had affirmed as to the impracticability of the man and of his principles.