The Online Library of Liberty

A project of Liberty Fund, Inc.

• Preface.
• Prolegomena.
• Chapter I.: Of the Works of Mencius.
• Section I.: Their Recognition Under the Han Dynasty, and Before It.
• Section II.: Chaou K‘e and His Labours Upon Mencius.
• Section III.: Other Commentators.
• Section IV.: Integrity; Authorship; and Reception Among the Classical Books.
• Chapter II.: Mencius and His Opinions.
• Section I.: Life of Mencius.
• Section II.: His Influence and Opinions.
• Appendix.
• I.: That the Nature Is Evil.
• II.: An Examination of the Nature of Man.
• Chapter III.: Of Yang Choo and Mih Teih.
• Section I.: The Opinions of Yang Choo.
• Section II.: The Opinions of Mih Teih.
• Universal Love. Part I.
• Universal Love. Part II.
• Universal Love. Part III.
• The Works of Mencius. *
• Book I. **
• King Hwuy of LËang. Part I.
• King Hwuy of Leang. Part II.
• Book II. *
• Kung-sun Ch‘ow. Part I.
• Kung-sun Ch‘ow. Part II.
• Book III. *
• T‘Ăng WĂn Kung. Part I.
• T‘Ăng WĂn Kung. Part II.
• Book IV.
• Le Low. Part I.
• Le Low. Part II.
• Book V. *
• Wan Chang. Part I.
• Wan Chang. Part II.
• Book VI. *
• Kaou-tsze. Part I.
• Kaou-tsze. Part II.
• Book VII. *
• Tsin Sin. Part I.
• Tsin Sin. Part II.

T‘ĂNG WĂN KUNG. PART I.

ChapterI.1. When duke Wăn of T‘ang was heir-son, being on a journey to Ts‘oo he passed by [the capital of] Sung, and had an interview with Mencius.

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.

III.1. Duke Wăn of T‘ăng asked [Mencius] about [the proper way of] governing a State.

2. Mencius said, “The business of the people must not be remissly attended to. It is said in the Book of Poetry,

• ‘In the daytime collect the grass,
• And at night twist it into ropes.
• Then get up quickly on our roofs:—
• We shall have to recommence our sowing.’

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,

• ‘May it rain first on our public fields,
• And then come to our private!’

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,

• ‘Although Chow was an old State,
• The [favouring] appointment lighted on it recently.’

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,

• ‘He smote the tribes of the west and the north;
• He punished King and Shoo.’

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.”

[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.