This book includes some of the most important expositions of Mengzi’s philosophical psychology and political philosophy. Among the most interesting and often-discussed passages in this book are 2A2 and 2A6.
[1.1] Mengzi’s disciple Gongsun Chou asked, “If you, Master, were to occupy an important position in Qi, could we expect that the achievements of Guan Zhong or Yanzi would be repeated?” [These were ministers in Qi who helped their rulers become powerful. (Mengzi did eventually become High Minister of Qi. See 2B6–2B10.)]
[1.2] Mengzi said, “You are genuinely a man of Qi. All you know about are Guan Zhong and Yanzi, and not the actions of sages and worthies. [Mengzi gives a more positive impression of Yanzi in 1B4. Perhaps the primary target of Mengzi’s criticisms here in 2A1 is Guan Zhong, whom [1.3] Gongsun Chou carelessly lumps together with Yanzi.] Someone once asked Zeng Xi, grandson of Kongzi’s disciple Zengzi, ‘Who is more worthy: you or Kongzi’s disciple Zilu?’ Zeng Xi replied diffidently, ‘Zilu, of whom my grandfather stood in awe, is more worthy.’ The questioner then said, ‘So who is more worthy: you or Guan Zhong?’ Zeng Xi was unhappy and angrily said, ‘How dare you compare me to Guan Zhong? For Guan Zhong to have had a ruler’s complete confidence like he did, and for him to have governed for as long as he did, and then for the height of his achievement to be so base—how dare you compare me to him?’” [Zilu was not one of Kongzi’s most talented disciples, and Guan Zhong succeeded in making his ruler Hegemon (see 2A3). So why would a Confucian rather be compared to the former? Yang Shi explained, “Compare it to being a chariot driver in a ritual hunt. Zilu ‘drove … in the prescribed manner’ and we don’t get anything; Guan Zhong’s achievement was simply to get birds by having ‘violated the rules’ (3B1.4).”]
[1.4] Mengzi concluded, “Guan Zhong was someone whom Zeng Xi would not emulate. And you hope for me to become like him?”
{34} [1.5] Gongsun Chou then asked, “Guan Zhong made his ruler Hegemon. Yanzi made his ruler illustrious. Are Guan Zhong and Yanzi not worth emulating?”
[1.6] Mengzi said, “Making the ruler of Qi into a King is as easy as turning over one’s hand.”
[1.7] Gongsun Chou said, “In that case, I have been terribly mistaken. I thought that when King Wen died after a hundred years, his Virtue had not yet spread throughout the world, and that King Wu and the Duke of Zhou perpetuated it, and only then was it broadly put into effect. Now what you say makes it seem easy to become King. So was King Wen not worth modeling oneself on?”1
[1.8] Mengzi said, “How could anyone match King Wen? From Tang, founder of the Shang dynasty, to Wu Ding, who revived the Virtue of that dynasty, six or seven rulers who were worthies or sages arose. The world had turned toward the Shang for a long time. Because it had been a long time it was difficult to change. Wu Ding brought the various lords to his court, and had the world as if it were in the palm of his hand. It was not long in between Wu Ding and Tyrant Zhou. Traces of the venerable families, surviving customs, prevailing trends, and good government of the earlier times persisted. There were also Tyrant Zhou’s minister Jiao Ge, his uncles Wangzi Bigan and Jizi, and his brothers Weizi and Wei Zhong. These were all worthies who assisted him in government. Hence, it was a long time before he lost it all. Before King Wen there was not a foot of ground that did not belong to Tyrant Zhou. There was not a single group of people that was not subject to him. Yet King Wen arose from a territory of just a hundred leagues square. This was very difficult. [Wangzi Bigan kept pleading with Tyrant Zhou to govern virtuously. Finally, Tyrant Zhou remarked that sages supposedly have bigger hearts than others, and that he wanted to see if Bigan had a heart to match his words. So he ordered his guards to rip the heart out of Bigan’s chest (cf. 6A6.3).]
[1.9] “The people of Qi have a saying: ‘Being clever isn’t as good as taking an opportunity. Even if you have a hoe, that isn’t as important as awaiting the right season.’ In the present time it is easy to become King. [1.10] At the apex of the Xia, Shang, and Zhou, their territory did not exceed a thousand leagues. But Qi now has that size territory. And you can hear roosters crow and dogs bark from one side of the state to the {35} other. Qi has that many people. Without needing to open any more land, and without needing to gather any more people, if he puts into effect benevolent government, nothing will be able to stop Qi’s ruler from becoming King.
“Moreover, never has the time without a King arising been longer [1.11] than this time. Never has the people’s suffering under ferocious government been greater than it is in this time. The hungry can easily be fed; the thirsty can easily be quenched. [Zhu Xi comments, “‘Easily be fed’ and ‘easily be quenched’ means that their hunger and thirst are [1.12] so extreme that they are not waiting for anything delicious.”] Kongzi [1.13] said, ‘Virtue spreads faster than couriers carrying commands.’ At the current time, if a state of ten thousand chariots puts benevolent government into effect, the people would be as happy as if they had been saved from hanging upside down. Hence, only in a time like this can one exert half the effort of the ancients and be assured twice the achievement.”
[2.1] Mengzi’s disciple Gongsun Chou asked, “Suppose that you, Master, were to be appointed Prime Minister in Qi and were able to put the Way into practice there. It would not be surprising even if the ruler of Qi were to become Hegemon or King. Would having such a great responsibility perturb your heart or not?”
Mengzi replied, “It would not. My heart has been unperturbed since I was forty.” [Zhu Xi comments, “This is the age when a gentleman is clear about the Way and his Virtue is well established. When Kongzi said, ‘at forty, I became free of doubts’ (2.4), he too was referring to having an unperturbed heart.”]
[2.2] Gongsun Chou continued, “In that case, you, Master, have far surpassed Meng Ben.”
Mengzi replied, “This is not difficult. Even Gaozi, though he did not understand the Way, had an unperturbed heart before I.” [Meng Ben was a warrior, who “when traveling by water, did not avoid serpents, and when traveling by land, did not avoid rhinoceroses or tigers.”2 Gaozi is a rival Master who is discussed in this passage and in 6A1–6. Gongsun Chou is praising Mengzi’s courage by comparing it to that of Meng Ben. But, as Mengzi goes on to explain, the courage of Meng Ben or Gaozi is a shallow kind that is easily obtained.]
{36} [2.3] Gongsun Chou then asked, “Is there a Way of having an unperturbed heart?”
Mengzi replied, “There is. [Chengzi explains, “If the heart is dominated by something, then it can be unperturbed.” In each of the following [2.4] cases, a person’s heart is dominated by something different.] As for Bogong You’s cultivation of courage, his body would not shrink, his eyes would not blink. He regarded the least slight from someone like being beaten in the marketplace. Insults he would not accept from a man in baggy rags he also would not accept from a ruler who could field ten thousand chariots. He looked upon running a sword through a ruler who could field ten thousand chariots like running through a man in rags. He was not in awe of the various lords. If an insult came his way he had to return it. [Zhu Xi explains, “Bogong You is an assassin. The necessity of winning is what dominates him, so he has an unperturbed heart.”]
[2.5] “As for Meng Shishe’s cultivation of courage, he said, ‘I look upon defeat the same as victory. To advance only after sizing up one’s enemy, to ponder whether one will achieve victory and only then join battle, this is to be in awe of the opposing armies. How can I be certain of victory? I can only be without fear.’ [Zhu Xi explains, “Meng Shishe is an aggressive soldier. Lacking fear is what dominates him, so he has an unperturbed heart.”
Notice that the account of Bogong You is largely a third-person description of his actions, while with Meng Shishe we have a first-person account of how he feels and thinks.]
[2.6] “Meng Shishe resembled Kongzi’s disciple Zengzi. Bogong You resembled Kongzi’s disciple Zixia. Now, I do not really know whose courage was preferable. Nonetheless, Meng Shishe preserved something crucial. [Zixia had a reputation for being intelligent and learned, but cold and perhaps lacking in personal commitment to the Way (Analects 3.8 and 6.13). Zhu Xi comments, “Bogong You concentrated on his enemy. Meng Shishe focused on maintaining himself. Zixia had firm faith in Kongzi. Zengzi ‘sought for it in himself’ (2A7, 4A4; Analects 15.21). Hence, although Bogong You and Meng Shishe are not on a level with Zengzi and Zixia, nonetheless, in terms of the manifestation of their qi, each resembles one of them in a certain respect. Between the former two, Mengzi does not know whose courage is preferable. But in terms of what they preserve, Meng Shishe gets what is more crucial than does Bogong You.” (On qi, see the commentary on 2A2.8.)]
[2.7] “Formerly, Zengzi said to his disciple Zixiang, ‘Are you fond of courage? I once heard about great courage from Kongzi:
{37} If I examine myself and am not upright, even if opposed by a man in baggy rags, I would not try to intimidate him. If I examine myself and am upright, even if it is thousands or tens of thousands of people who oppose me, I shall go forward.’
[Zengzi’s comment is consistent with Kongzi’s statement that “To see what is right, but to fail to do it, is to be lacking in courage” (Analects [2.8] 2.24).] Meng Shishe’s preserving his qi was not as good as Zengzi’s preserving what is crucial.” [As A. C. Graham explains, in Mengzi’s era, qi “is like such words in other cultures as Greek pneuma ‘wind, air, breath.’ It is the energetic fluid which vitalises the body, in particular as the breath, and which circulates outside us as the air.” Later, this concept is “adapted to cosmology as the universal fluid … out of which all things condense and into which they dissolve.”3 (This late sense is how thinkers like Zhu Xi understood it.) Qi is thus the physical medium through which one’s emotions and personal character are manifested. So to “preserve one’s qi” is to control one’s emotions. Meng Shishe was similar to Zengzi in that both focused on something inside themselves, as opposed to Bogong You and Zixia, who focused on something external to themselves. However, as Zhu Xi explains, “what Meng Shishe preserved was just the qi of one’s self. This is not as good as Zengzi’s examining himself and following the Pattern (of the Way). He preserved what is especially important. Mengzi’s unperturbed heart has its source in this.”4]
[2.9a] Gongsun Chou next asked, “May I hear about your unperturbed heart, Master, and Gaozi’s unperturbed heart?”
Mengzi replied, “Gaozi said, ‘What you do not get from doctrines, do not seek for in your heart. What you do not get from your heart, do not seek for in the qi.’ ‘What you do not get from your heart, do not seek for in the qi,’ is acceptable. ‘What you do not get from doctrines, do not seek for in your heart,’ is unacceptable. [Zhu Xi explains this difficult passage as follows: “Gaozi said that if there is something that one does not understand in doctrines, then one should set the doctrine aside and need not examine and search for the Pattern in one’s heart. If one is not at peace in one’s heart, then one should regulate one’s {38} heart with force and need not further seek for help from the qi. This is the way in which he firmly maintained his heart and quickly became unperturbed. Having recited Gaozi’s doctrines, Mengzi passes judgment on them: When Gaozi says that what you do not get from your heart you should not seek for in the qi, this is being concerned about the root and relaxed about the branches—that is acceptable. When he says that what you do not get from doctrines you should not seek from the heart, then he is already lost due to external things, and so has left behind what is internal. This is necessarily unacceptable.”
David S. Nivison offered an alternative interpretation, based on a parallel between this passage and Zhuangzi’s fictional dialogue between “Kongzi” and “Yan Hui”: Gaozi recommends that we completely commit ourselves to following correct ethical doctrines, forcing our heart and our qi to follow what they dictate. In contrast, Mengzi recommends that we not only follow ethical doctrines but seek further to find the basis for these doctrines in the reactions of our heart (2A6, 6A10), which will then guide our qi. Finally, Zhuangzi recommends that we ultimately eschew doctrines, empty our hearts, and follow the promptings of the qi, which unites us with other things.5]
[2.9b] “Your will is the commander of the qi. Qi fills the body. When your will is fixed somewhere, the qi sets up camp there. Hence, it is said, ‘Maintain your will. Do not injure the qi.’” [The “will” is simply the heart when it is focused on some goal.]
[2.10] Gongsun Chou continued, “Since you have already said, ‘When your will is fixed somewhere, the qi sets up camp there,’ why do you add, ‘Maintain your will. Do not injure the qi’?”
Mengzi replied, “When your will is unified, it moves the qi. When the qi is unified, it moves your will. Now, running and stumbling have to do with the qi, but nonetheless they perturb one’s heart.” [Zhu Xi comments, “Mengzi explains that if the direction of the will is unified, the qi will definitely follow it. Nonetheless, if that which the qi rests in is unified, then the will, on the contrary, will be moved by it. For example, if someone is running and stumbling, the qi is focused on this and it will, on the contrary, move the will. This is why one must both maintain one’s will but also not injure the qi.”]
[2.11] Gongsun Chou next asked, “May I ask wherein you excel, Master?” Mengzi replied, “I understand doctrines. I am good at cultivating my {39} floodlike qi.” [Zhu Xi suggests that Gongsun Chou is asking specifically about how Mengzi’s unperturbed heart is better than Gaozi’s unperturbed heart. He then comments, “By ‘understanding doctrines’ one has the wherewithal to understand the Way and righteousness and to not be in doubt about any situation in the world. By ‘cultivating the qi,’ one has the wherewithal to harmonize with the Way and righteousness and to not be in fear about any situation in the world. This is the manner in which he can assume a great responsibility yet have an unperturbed heart. Gaozi’s learning is the exact opposite of this. His unperturbed heart is nothing more than being ignorantly unaware and stubbornly unmindful.” (See 2A2.17 for more on “understanding doctrines.”)]
[2.12] Gongsun Chou continued, “May I ask what is meant by ‘floodlike qi’?”
Mengzi replied, “It is difficult to explain. [Zhu Xi uses language suggestive of mystical insight to explain this statement: “Mengzi’s heart has attained it by itself, and it has no form or sound to give evidence for it. It has a form that is not easy to put into words. Hence, Cheng Yi said, ‘If one considers this one statement, we can tell that Mengzi genuinely has [2.13] this qi.’”] It is a qi that is supremely great and supremely unyielding. If one cultivates it with uprightness and does not harm it, it will fill up the space between Heaven and Earth. [Cheng Yi explains, “Heaven and humans are one. There is no division. The floodlike qi is just my qi. If it is nurtured and not harmed, then ‘it will fill up the space between Heaven and Earth.’ But as soon as there is the obscuration of the tiniest [2.14] selfish thought, one is discontented and ‘starved.’”] It is a qi that harmonizes with righteousness and the Way. Without these, it starves. [Zhu Xi explains, “This verse means that if people can nurture this qi to completion, then their qi will harmonize with the Way and righteousness and assist them, so that, in one’s actions, one will have a courage and resoluteness that lacks any doubts or fears. Without this qi, then even if one’s actions do not necessarily diverge from the Way and righteousness, nonetheless one’s body will not be filled with qi, so that one cannot avoid doubts and fears, and one will be unable to be effective.”] [2.15] It is produced by accumulated righteousness. It cannot be obtained by a seizure of righteousness. If some of one’s actions leave one’s heart unsatisfied, it will starve. Consequently, I say that Gaozi never understood righteousness, because he regarded it as external. [Zhu Xi explains, “This means that, although qi can harmonize with the Way and righteousness, the beginning of nurturing it is to have every action accord with righteousness. If one examines oneself and is constantly {40} upright, one will be ashamed of nothing, and this qi will naturally be produced from within. One cannot do only a single action that accidentally accords with righteousness and then get it by a ‘seizure’ of what is external. ‘If some of one’s actions leave one’s heart unsatisfied, it will starve’ means that as soon as what one does is not in accord with righteousness and one examines oneself and is not upright, then there will be an inadequacy in one’s heart, and one’s body will not be filled. This being the case, how could righteousness be external? Gaozi did not understand the Pattern of this, so he said, ‘Benevolence is internal,’ ‘righteousness is external’ (6A4–5), and because he did not regard becoming righteous as a task, he was necessarily unable to accumulate righteousness in order to produce the floodlike qi. The earlier verse, ‘What you do not get from doctrines, do not seek for in your heart’ (2A2.9a), is precisely the meaning of treating righteousness as external.”]
[2.16a] “One must work at it, but do not assume success. One should not forget the heart, but neither should one ‘help’ it grow. Do not be like the man from Song. Among the people of the state of Song there was a farmer who, concerned lest his sprouts not grow, pulled on them. Obliviously, he returned home and said to his family, ‘Today I am worn out. I helped the sprouts to grow.’ His son rushed out and looked at them. The sprouts were withered. [The people of the state of Song were the butt of many jokes because of their supposed stupidity. We might say that the farmer from Song is someone who “act[ed] out benevolence and righteousness,” rather than “acting out of benevolence and righteousness” (4B19.2). Zhu Xi comments, “Those who nurture their qi must take accumulating righteousness as their task but not anticipate its effectiveness. If they happen to fail to be filled (with floodlike qi), they should simply not forget what they are in service to, and may not do anything to ‘help’ it grow. This is the process for accumulating righteousness [2.16b] and nurturing the qi.”] Those in the world who do not ‘help’ the sprouts to grow are few. Those who abandon them, thinking it will not help, are those who do not weed their sprouts. Those who ‘help’ them grow are those who pull on the sprouts. Not only does this not help, but it even harms them.” [Zhu Xi comments, “Those who abandon them and do not weed forget what they are working for. Those who pull on them and ‘help’ them to grow assume they have it, and when they do not get it, they act recklessly. If one does not weed, then one will only fail to nurture it, but if one pulls on it, then one will, on the contrary, harm it. If one avoids these two things, then one’s qi will be nurtured and will not be injured. If like Gaozi one is unable to {41} accumulate righteousness but desires to force one’s heart to be regulated, then one will be unable to avoid the twin faults of assuming and assisting. Not only will he not be good at cultivating the ‘floodlike,’ but he will even harm it.”
Iris Murdoch makes a similar point: “Self-knowledge will lead us to avoid occasions of temptation rather than to rely on naked strength to overcome them. We must not arrogate to ourselves actions which belong to those whose spiritual vision is higher or other than ours. From this attempt, only disaster will come.” In short, “One must perform the lower act which one can manage and sustain: not the higher act that one bungles.”6]
[2.17] Gongsun Chou next asked, “What do you mean by ‘understanding doctrines’?”
Mengzi replied, “If someone’s expressions are one-sided, I know that by which they are obscured. If someone’s expressions are excessive, I know what they have sunk into. If someone’s expressions are heretical, I know that by which they are separated from the Way. If someone’s expressions are evasive, I know that by which they are overwhelmed. When these faults grow in the heart, they are harmful in governing. When they are manifested in governing, they are harmful in one’s activities. When sages arise again, they will surely follow what I have said.” [Zhu Xi comments, “Gaozi did not understand doctrines, yet he was unwilling to seek for it in his heart. He reached the point of the theory that ‘righteousness is external,’ and then he naturally could not evade those four disabilities. How could he understand the doctrines of the world and have no doubts about them?!”]
[2.18] Gongsun Chou continued, “Among Kongzi’s disciples, Zai Wo and Zigong were good at rhetoric, while Ran Niu, Minzi, and Yan Yuan were good at discussing virtuous actions.7 Kongzi combined all these, but he said, ‘When it comes to rhetoric, I am incapable.’ In that case, are you, Master, already a sage?” [Cheng Hao takes Kongzi’s comment to be a strategic lie: “Kongzi said of himself that he was incapable in regard to rhetoric simply because he desired to make learners focus on the root.”] [2.19] Mengzi replied, “Oh, how could you ask me this? “Formerly, Kongzi’s disciple Zigong asked him, ‘Are you, Master, really a sage?’ Kongzi replied, ‘One cannot consider me a sage. I simply {42} learn without tiring and instruct without wearying.’8 Zigong said, ‘To learn without tiring is wisdom; to instruct without wearying is benevolence. Being benevolent and wise, the Master is certainly already a sage!’ So, even Kongzi was not comfortable with being regarded as a sage. How could you ask me this?”
[2.20] Gongsun Chou continued, “Formerly, I heard the following: Kongzi’s disciples Zixia, Ziyou, and Zizhang all had one part of the substance of a sage, while Ran Niu, Minzi, and Yan Yuan had the complete substance of a sage but in miniature. I venture to ask in which group you would be comfortable?”
[2.21] Mengzi replied, “Let’s talk about something else.” [Mengzi does not want to include himself in such a distinguished group.]
[2.22] Gongsun Chou then asked, “What about Bo Yi and Yi Yin?”
Mengzi said, “They had different Ways. If he was not his ruler, he would not serve him; if they were not his subjects, he would not direct them; if things were orderly, he would take office; if they were chaotic, he would leave office. This was Bo Yi.
“‘Whom do I serve who is not my ruler? Whom do I direct who are not my subjects?’ If things were orderly, he would take office, and if they were chaotic, he would also take office. This was Yi Yin.
“When one should take office, he would take office; when one should stop, he would stop; when one should take a long time, he would take a long time; when one should hurry, he would hurry. This was Kongzi. All were sages of ancient times. I have never been able to act like them, but my wish is to learn from Kongzi.” [Mengzi frequently cites Bo Yi and Yi Yin as examples of individuals who attain one aspect of sagehood but fall short of the complete sageliness of Kongzi. For sketches of their lives and actions, see 5B1.]
[2.23] Gongsun Chou continued, “Were Bo Yi and Yi Yin at the same level as Kongzi?”
Mengzi replied, “No. Since humans were first born there has never been another Kongzi.”
[2.24] Gongsun Chou continued, “In that case, were there any similarities?”
Mengzi replied, “There were. If any became ruler of a territory of a hundred leagues, he would be able to possess the world by bringing the various lords to his court. And if any could obtain the world by {43} performing one unrighteous deed, or killing one innocent person, he would not do it. In these things they are the same.” [Mengzi (and Zhu Xi) place great emphasis on using “discretion” (4A17) to flexibly respond to complex circumstances. However, this verse makes clear that there are some absolute prohibitions that one may not violate.]
[2.25] Gongsun Chou continued, “I venture to ask wherein they differed?” Mengzi replied, “Consider what was said by Kongzi’s disciples Zai Wo, Zigong, and You Ruo. They had wisdom sufficient to appreciate the Way of Kongzi, and would not stoop to showing favoritism to [2.26] someone simply because they were fond of him. Zai Wo said, ‘In my view, Kongzi is far more worthy than Yao and Shun!’ [Cheng Yi said, “Yao and Shun ruled the world, but the Master extended their Way, holding it up to instruct ten thousand generations. How could later generations have based themselves on the Way of Yao and Shun without [2.27] Kongzi?”] Zigong said, ‘If you see their rituals, you understand their government; if you hear their music, you understand their Virtue; from a hundred generations later, through the succession of a hundred kings, nothing can get away: from this perspective, I can see that, since [2.28] humans were first born, there has never been another like Kongzi.’ You Ruo said, ‘There is something that is the case not only with people: the unicorn among beasts, the phoenix among birds, Mount Tai among mounds and anthills, and the Yellow River and the seas among flowing waters are all of the same kind. The sage is also of the same kind as other people. But some stand out from their kind; some stand out from the pack: since humans were first born, there has never been one who has reached a greater summit than Kongzi.’” [Cheng Yi and Cheng Hao said, “In this chapter, Mengzi develops what has not been expressed before by previous sages. Learners should immerse their hearts and delve into it.”]
[3.1] Mengzi said, “One who uses power to feign benevolence is a Hegemon. A Hegemon must have a large state. One who uses Virtue to put benevolence into effect is a King. A King does not depend on size. Tang had a territory of seventy leagues square. King Wen had a hundred [3.2] leagues square. If one makes others submit with power, their hearts do not submit. Power is inadequate to make their hearts submit. If one makes others submit with Virtue, they are pleased in their hearts and genuinely submit, like the seventy disciples who served Kongzi. The Odes say,
This expresses it.”
[4.1] Mengzi said, “If one is benevolent, one will have glory. If one is not benevolent, one will have disgrace. Now, to dislike disgrace yet to dwell in what is not benevolent, this is like disliking wetness and dwelling in [4.2] the damp. If one dislikes it, there is nothing better than esteeming the Virtuous and respecting the noble. If the worthy are in office and the capable have authority, the state is at ease. Arriving at this moment, they should make clear to the people the government rules and punishments. Then even the large states will have to be in awe. [Zhu Xi comments, “The ‘worthy’ are those with Virtue. If one puts them in office, that is sufficient to correct the ruler and make the customs of the people good. The ‘capable’ are those with talent. If one gives them authority, that is [4.3] sufficient to improve government and put affairs in order.”] The Odes say,
When it has not yet rained
I use mulberry bark
To weave the door of my nest.
Now who of the people below
Dares to reproach me?10
Kongzi said, ‘The one who made this ode understood the Way! If one is capable of ruling one’s state, who would dare to reproach him?’ [Zhu Xi claims that the author of this ode was the Duke of Zhou, who “thought that a bird’s building a nest is like this, and compared it to a ruler’s making a state. One should similarly reflect upon calamities and prepare for them” in times when one is “at ease” (as described in 4.2).]
[4.4] “But nowadays when a state is at ease, it is overly joyful and [4.5] arrogant. This is to seek disaster for oneself. Disaster and good fortune are [4.6] always things that one seeks outside oneself. The Odes say,
As long as one’s doctrines accord with the Mandate
One is seeking much good fortune for oneself.11
{45} The ‘Tai Jia’ chapter from the Documents says, ‘Disasters heaven-sent can still be escaped; disasters self-made one cannot survive.’12 This expresses it.” [In the ode, “Mandate” refers to the Way decreed by Heaven (cf. 5A5).]
[5.1] Mengzi said, “If one respects the worthy, employs the capable, and puts the outstanding in office, then the nobles of the world will be pleased [5.2] and will wish to take their place in your court. If one taxes the shops in one’s markets, but not their goods, or regulates them but does not tax either the shops or their goods, then the merchants of the world [5.3] will all be pleased and will wish to store goods in one’s markets. If one’s customs officers inspect but do not tax, then the travelers of the world [5.4] will be pleased and will wish to go out on your roads. If those who plow must provide assistance but are not taxed, then the farmers of the [5.5] world will be pleased and will wish to plow your fields.13 If shopholders need not pay the personal or village surtax, then the people of the [5.6] world will be pleased and willing to be one’s subjects. If one is truly capable of putting into effect these five things, then the people of neighboring states will welcome you like a father or mother. To lead sons and younger brothers to attack a father and mother is something that has never succeeded since the birth of humans. If it is like this, one will have no enemies in the world. One who has no enemies in the world is the agent of Heaven. It has never happened that someone is like this yet fails to become King.” [This passage illustrates that Mengzi was not a purely theoretical philosopher. He was a “public intellectual,” concerned with the concrete details of government reform and public policy.
Zhu Xi comments, “This chapter means that if one is capable of putting into effect Kingly government, then bandits and barbarians will become like one’s father and sons. If one does not put into effect Kingly government, then even children will be one’s enemies.”]
[6.1] Mengzi said, “All humans have hearts that are not unfeeling toward others. [There are various causal accounts of why humans have this “heart.” For Mengzi, this heart is implanted in us by Heaven, a sort of semi-personal higher power (7A1). For Zhu Xi, benevolence is not only a personal virtue, it is a basic cosmological principle underlying even the natural world: “The heart of Heaven and Earth is giving birth to {46} things. These things each get this as their heart. This is why humans all [6.2] have hearts that are not unfeeling toward others.”] The Former Kings had hearts that were not unfeeling toward others, so they had governments that were not unfeeling toward others. If one puts into practice a government that is not unfeeling toward others by means of a heart that is not unfeeling toward others, bringing order to the whole world is in the palm of your hand. [This chapter illustrates how Mengzi’s philosophical psychology relates to his political philosophy.]
[6.3] “The reason why I say that all humans have hearts that are not unfeeling toward others is this. Suppose someone suddenly saw a child about to fall into a well: anyone in such a situation would have a feeling of alarm and compassion—not because one sought to get in good with the child’s parents, not because one wanted fame among one’s neighbors and friends, and not because one would dislike the sound of the child’s cries.14 [Note that Mengzi does not say that every human would necessarily act to save the child. All he claims is that any human would have at least a momentary feeling (literally, “heart”) of genuine compassion, and that the reaction would occur “suddenly” (which shows that it is not the result of calculations of self-interest). This passage is, in part, a response to the “ethical egoist” Yang Zhu, who seems to have claimed that only self-interested motivations are part of human nature. (See 3B9.9 and the Introduction for more on this philosopher.)15]
[6.4] “From this we can see that if one is without the feeling of compassion, one is not human. If one is without the feeling of disdain, one is not human. If one is without the feeling of deference, one is not human. If one is without the {47} feeling of approval and disapproval, one is not human. [On these feelings (literally, “hearts”) see also 6A6. With the story of Ox Mountain (6A8), Mengzi explains how someone could [6.5] lose these hearts and become “not human.”] The feeling of compassion is the sprout of benevolence. The feeling of disdain is the sprout of righteousness. The feeling of deference is the sprout of propriety. The feeling of approval and disapproval is the sprout of wisdom.16 [Zhu Xi believes that righteousness, propriety, and wisdom are manifestations of benevolence, and that this is why Mengzi goes on to discuss each of them here, after giving an illustration of only benevolence. Zhu Xi thus interprets Mengzi as holding the doctrine of “the unity of the virtues” (see commentary on 2A7.2). He also suggests, “Compassion, disdain, deference, and approval and disapproval are emotions. Benevolence, righteousness, propriety, and wisdom are human nature. The heart is what links the nature and emotions.” (See “Zhu Xi’s Reinterpretation,” in the Introduction, for more on how he understands this verse.)]
[6.6] “People having these four sprouts is like their having four limbs. To have these four sprouts, yet to claim that one is incapable (of virtue), is to steal from oneself. To say that one’s ruler is incapable is to steal from one’s ruler. [A “normal,” healthy human has four limbs. Similarly, a normal human has the four “sprouts.” But, as the comparison to limbs [6.7] suggests, it is possible to lose the sprouts (6A8).] In general, having these four sprouts within oneself, if one knows to fill them all out, it will be like a fire starting up, a spring breaking through! If one can merely fill them out, they will be sufficient to care for all within the Four Seas. If one merely fails to fill them out, they will be insufficient to serve one’s parents.” [Mengzi thinks the capacity for virtue is innate in humans, but it must be cultivated (“filled out”) in order for us to become fully virtuous. He discusses this process of filling out (which he also calls “extending”) in many passages, including 1A7.12, 7A15, 7A17, and 7B31.]
[7.1] Mengzi said, “Is the arrow-maker less benevolent than the armor-maker? Yet the arrow-maker only fears that he may not harm people; the armor-maker only fears that he may harm people. The shaman-healer and the coffin-maker are the same way, respectively. Hence, one may not fail to be careful about one’s choice of craft. [The arrow-maker and the coffin-maker are born with the same heart of benevolence as the armor-maker and the shaman-healer. But their choices of career and way of life determine whether they want humans to live or die.]
[7.2] “Kongzi said, ‘To dwell in benevolence is beautiful; if one chooses to not dwell in benevolence, how can one be wise?’ (4.1) Now, benevolence is Heaven’s rank of respect and people’s abode of peace. If one is not benevolent though nothing prevents it, this is to fail to be wise. [Zhu Xi explains this in terms of the unity of the virtues: “Benevolence is the heart of Heaven and Earth in giving birth to things. One gets it first [7.3] of all, and it links all four virtues together.” (Cf. 2A6.5.)] One fails to {48} be benevolent and fails to be wise. So one lacks propriety and righteousness. This is to be the lackey of other people. To be the lackey of other people yet to be ashamed of being a lackey is like being a bowmaker yet to be ashamed of making bows, or to be an arrow-maker yet to be ashamed of making arrows. [Zhu Xi explains, “Because one is not benevolent, one is not wise. Because one is not wise, one does not understand wherein propriety and righteousness lie.”]
[7.4] “If you are ashamed of it, there is nothing as good as becoming benevolent. [Zhu Xi comments, “He does not discuss wisdom, propriety, and righteousness, because benevolence encompasses the entire substance. If one can become benevolent, then the other three are in its midst.”] [7.5] Benevolence is like archery. An archer corrects himself and only then shoots. If he shoots but does not hit the mark, he does not resent the one who defeats him but simply turns and seeks for it in himself.” [As Kongzi observed, “Does becoming benevolent come from oneself, or does it come from others?!” (12.1)]
[8.1] Mengzi said, “Kongzi’s disciple Zilu was pleased if someone informed him of his faults. [Zhu Xi explains, “He was pleased that he heard about them so he could reform them. Such was his courage in self-cultivation.” Zhou Dunyi commented, “Nowadays, when people have a fault, they are not pleased to be corrected by others. This is like concealing an illness [8.2] and shunning medicine.” (On Zilu, cf. 5.14)] When King Yu heard good teachings he bowed down in thanks. [Zhu Xi explains, “He did not wait to have a fault, but was capable of humbling himself [8.3] to accept what was good in the world.”] The Great Shun was even greater than they. He was good at unifying himself with others. He put himself aside and joined with others. He delighted in copying from [8.4] others in order to do good. From plowing, planting, making pottery, and fishing on up to being Emperor—he never failed to copy from others. [Zhu Xi explains that “when Shun was undistinguished, he plowed on Mount Li, he made pottery on the shores of the Yellow River, and he fished in Thunder Pond.” (Shun was greater than Zilu or King Yu, because he did not await being told criticisms or hearing good advice.)] [8.5] To copy others when they do good is to do good with others. Hence, for a gentleman, nothing is greater than to do good with others.” [Zhu Xi comments, “If I copy what is good in someone else and do it myself, then it encourages him to do good too. This is my helping him to do good. What greater good is there for the gentleman than to be capable of encouraging all the people of the world to do good?”]
{49} [9.1] Mengzi said, “If someone was not Bo Yi’s ruler, he would not serve him. If someone was not his friend, he would not treat him as his friend. He would not take a position at the court of a bad person, nor would he have a discussion with a bad person. He looked upon taking a position at the court of a bad person or having a discussion with a bad person like wearing one’s court cap and gown and sitting down in filth. He extended his heart of disdain for evil to the point that, if he stood with an ordinary villager, but his cap was not on correctly, he would leave without meeting his eyes, as if he thought he was about to be defiled. For this reason, when the assorted lords came with fine rhetoric, he would not accept them. He did not accept them because he was adamant that going to them was not pure. [Bo Yi’s disdain to do what is wrong is a manifestation of the heart of righteousness (2A6, 6A6). Consequently, he is highly commendable. However, he has extended his heart too far. On “extension,” see 1A7.12. For more on Bo Yi, see 5B1.]
[9.2] “Liuxia Hui was not ashamed of a corrupt lord, and did not consider a petty office unworthy. In taking office, he did not conceal what was worthy but would necessarily act in accordance with the Way. When he was discharged, he was not bitter. In difficult and impoverished circumstances, he was not anxious. Hence, he said, ‘You are you, and I am I. Even if you are stark naked beside me, how can you defile me?’ Hence, contentedly, he was with others without losing himself. If constrained to remain, he would remain. He remained when constrained to remain because he was adamant that leaving was not pure.” [Zhu Xi explains that, “’Without losing himself’ is without losing his uprightness.” Liuxia Hui’s willingness to adapt to circumstances shows the “discretion” that is so central to Confucianism (4A17). However, he ends up compromising too much. For more on Liuxia Hui, see 5B1.]
[9.3] Mengzi observed, “Bo Yi was too constrained; Liuxia Hui was not dignified. A gentleman is neither too constrained nor lacking in dignity.” [Zhu Xi comments, “The actions of Bo Yi and Liuxia Hui definitely both reached the highest level. Nonetheless, since they have some biases, they definitely have an obscured view (of the Way). Hence, they cannot be followed as models.”]
_____________________________
1 On “Virtue,” see the commentary on 1A7.3.
2 Jiao Xun, Mengzi zhengyi, commentary on 2A2.
3 Graham, Disputers of the Tao, 101.
4 For more on qi, see the Introduction. For a discussion of 2A2.1–8, see Van Norden, “Mencius on Courage,” in The Philosophy of Religion, ed. Peter A. French et al., in Midwest Studies in Philosophy, vol. 21 (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1997), 237–56. For more on courage, see 1B3.
5 See David S. Nivison, “Philosophical Voluntarism in Fourth Century China,” in The Ways of Confucianism, 121–32, and Zhuangzi 4, “The Human Realm,” in Readings, 228.
6 Iris Murdoch, The Bell (204, 201), as quoted in David S. Nivison, “Motivation and Moral Action in Mencius,” The Ways of Confucianism, 110.
7 Cf. Analects 11.3.
8 Cf. Analects 7.34. The comment by Zigong that follows in the Mengzi is not in the Analects passage. Instead, Gong Xihua comments, “This is precisely what we disciples are unable to learn.”
9 Mao no. 244. This ode describes the reign of King Wen.
10 Mao no. 155.
11 Mao no. 235.
12 “Tai Jia,” Part 2, from the Documents Shang in the Documents (Legge, The Shoo King, vol. 3 of The Chinese Classics, 207).
13 On providing “assistance,” see the commentary on 1B5.3.
14 Zhu Xi understands the last clause as meaning, “… and not because one would dislike having a bad reputation.”
15 For a dialogue that may represent something like Yang Zhu’s position, see Readings, 369–75. See also Van Norden, Virtue Ethics and Consequentialism in Early Chinese Philosophy, 200–11.
16 Zhuangzi is criticizing this passage when he argues that “the sprouts of benevolence and righteousness and the pathways of right and wrong are all snarled and jumbled” (Zhuangzi 2; in Readings, 222).