The Chinese Classics by James Legge (ereader for textbooks .TXT) 📕

1 See the ������������, as above.

2 See the Li Chi, II. Sect. II. iii. 15. ��������������� must be understood as I have done above, and not with Chang Hsuan, — ‘Your mother was born a Miss Shu.’

3 ������ — this was the designation of Tsze-sze’s son.

4 ���,— this was Tsze-shang’s name.

5 See the Li Chi, II. Sect. I. i. 4.

As a public character, we find him at the ducal courts of Wei, Sung; Lu, and Pi, and at each of them held in high esteem by the rulers. To Wei he was carried probably by the fact of his mother having married into that State. We are told that the prince of Wei received him with great distinction and lodged him honourably. On one occasion he said to him, ‘An officer of the State of Lu, you have not despised this small and narrow Wei, but have bent your steps hither to comfort and preserve it; vouchsafe to confer your benefits upon me.’ Tsze-sze replied. ‘If I should wish to requite your princely favour with money and silks, your treasuries are already full of them, and I am poor. If I should wish to requite it with good words, I am afraid that what I should say would not suit your ideas, so that I should speak in vain and not be listened to. The only way in which I can requite it, is by recommending to your notice men of worth.’ The duke said. ‘Men of worth are exactly what I desire.’ ‘Nay,’ said Chi. ‘you are not able to appreciate them.’ ‘Nevertheless,’ was the reply, ‘I should like to hear whom you consider deserving that name.’ Tsze-sze replied, ‘Do you wish to select your officers for the name they may have or for their reality?’ ‘For their reality, certainly,’ said the duke. His guest then said, ‘In the eastern borders of your State, there is one Li Yin, who is a man of real worth.’ ‘What were his grandfather and father?’ asked the duke. ‘They were husbandmen,’ was the reply, on which the duke broke into a loud laugh, saying, ‘ I do not like husbandry. The son of a husbandman cannot be fit for me to employ. I do not put into office all the cadets of those families even in which office is hereditary.’ Tsze-sze observed, ‘I mention Li Yin because of his abilities; what has the fact of his forefathers being husbandmen to do with the case? And moreover, the duke of Chau was a great sage, and K’ang-shu was a great worthy. Yet if you examine their beginnings, you will find that from the business of husbandry they came forth to found their States. I did certainly have my doubts that in the selection of your officers you did not have regard to their real character and capacity.’ With this the conversation ended. The duke was silent [1].

Tsze-sze was naturally led to Sung, as the K’ung family originally sprang from that principality. One account, quoted in ‘The

1 See the ���������,������������,������,������.

Four Books, Text and Commentary, with Proofs and Illustrations [1],’ says that he went thither in his sixteenth year, and having foiled an officer of the State, named Yo So, in a conversation on the Shu Ching, his opponent was so irritated at the disgrace put on him by a youth, that he listened to the advice of evil counsellors, and made an attack on him to put him to death. The duke of Sung, hearing the tumult, hurried to the rescue, and when Chi found himself in safety, he said, ‘When king Wan was imprisoned in Yu-li, he made the Yi of Chau. My grandfather made the Ch’un Ch’iu after he had been in danger in Ch’an and Ts’ai. Shall I not make something when rescued from such a risk in Sung?’ Upon this he made the Chung Yung in forty-nine p’ien.

According to this account, the Chung Yung was the work of Tsze-sze’s early manhood, and the tradition has obtained a wonderful prevalence. The notice in ‘The Sacrificial Canon’ says, on the contrary, that it was the work of his old age, when he had finally settled in Lu, which is much more likely [2].

Of Tsze-sze in Pi, which could hardly be said to be out of Lu, we have only one short notice,— in Mencius, V. Pt. II. iii. 3, where the duke Hui of Pi is introduced as saying, ‘I treat Tsze-sze as my master.’

We have fuller accounts of him in Lu, where he spent all the latter years of his life, instructing his disciples to the number of several hundred [3], and held in great reverence by the duke Mu. The duke indeed wanted to raise him to the highest office, but he declined this, and would only occupy the position of a ‘guide, philosopher, and friend.’ Of the attention which he demanded, however, instances will he found in Mencius, II. Pt. II. xi. 3; V. Pt. II. vi. 4, and vii. 4. In his intercourse with the duke he spoke the truth to him fearlessly. In the ‘Cyclopaedia of Surnames [4],’ I find the following conversations, but I cannot tell from what source they are extracted into that Work.— ‘One day, the duke said to Tsze-sze, “The officer Hsien told me that you do good without

1 This is the Work so often referred to as the ������������, the full title being ������������������. The passage here translated from it will be found in the place several times referred to in this section.

2 The author of the ��������������� adopts the view that the Work was composed in Sung. Some have advocated this from ch. xxviii. 5, compared with Ana. III. ix, ‘it being proper,’ they say, ‘that Tsze-sze, writing in Sung, should not depreciate it as Confucius had done out of it!’

3 See in the ‘Sacrificial Canon,’ on Tsze-sze.

4 This is the Work referred to in note 1, p. 40.

wishing for any praise from men;— is it so?” Tsze-sze replied, “No, that is not my feeling. When I cultivate what is good, I wish men to know it, for when they know it and praise me, I feel encouraged to be more zealous in the cultivation. This is what I desire, and am not able to obtain. If I cultivate what is good, and men do not know it, it is likely that in their ignorance they will speak evil of me. So by my good-doing I only come to be evil spoken of. This is what I do not desire, but am not able to avoid. In the case of a man, who gets up at cock-crowing to practise what is good and continues sedulous in the endeavour till midnight, and says at the same time that he does not wish men to know it, lest they should praise him, I must say of such a man, that, if he be not deceitful, he is stupid.”’

Another day, the duke asked Tsze-sze, saying, ‘Can my state be made to flourish?’ ‘It may,’ was the reply. ‘And how?’ Tsze-sze said, ‘O prince, if you and your ministers will only strive to realize the government of the duke of Chau and of Po-ch’in; practising their transforming principles, sending forth wide the favours of your ducal house, and not letting advantages flow in private channels; if you will thus conciliate the affections of the people, and at the same time cultivate friendly relations with neighboring states, your state will soon begin to flourish.’

On one occasion, the duke asked whether it had been the custom of old for ministers to go into mourning for a prince whose service and state they had left. Tsze-sze replied to him, ‘Of old, princes advanced their ministers to office according to propriety, and dismissed them in the same way, and hence there was that rule. But now-a-days, princes bring their ministers forward as if they were going to take them on their knees, and send them away as if they would cast them into an abyss. If they do not treat them as their greatest enemies, it is well.— How can you expect the ancient practice to be observed in such circumstances [1]?’

These instances may suffice to illustrate the character of Tsze-sze, as it was displayed in his intercourse with the princes of his time. We see the same independence which he affected in private life, and a dignity not unbecoming the grandson of Confucius. But we miss the reach of thought and capacity for administration which belonged to the Sage. It is with him, how-1 This conversation is given in the Li Chi, II. Sect. II. Pt. ii, 1.

ever, as a thinker and writer that we have to do, and his rank in that capacity will appear from the examination of the Chung Yung in the section iv below. His place in the temples of the Sage has been that of one of his four assessors, since the year 1267. He ranks with Yen Hui, Tsang Shan, and Mencius, and bears the title of ‘The Philosopher Tsze-sze, Transmitter of the Sage [1].’

SECTION III.

ITS INTEGRITY.

In the testimony of K’ung Fu, which has been adduced to prove the authorship of the Chung Yung, it is said that the Work consisted originally of forty-nine p’ien. From this statement it is argued by some, that the arrangement of it in thirty-three chapters, which originated with Chu Hsi, is wrong [2]; but this does not affect the question of integrity, and the character p’ien is so vague and indefinite, that we cannot affirm that K’ung Fu meant to tell us by it that Tsze-sze himself divided his Treatise into so many paragraphs or chapters.

It is on the entry in Liu Hsin’s Catalogue, quoted section i,— ‘Two p’ien of Observations on the Chung Yung,’ that the integrity of the present Work is called in question. Yen Sze-ku, of the Tang dynasty, has a note on that entry to the effect:— ‘There is now the Chung Yung in the Li Chi in one p’ien. But that is not the original Treatise here mentioned, but only a branch from it [3]’ Wang Wei, a writer of the Ming dynasty, says:— ‘Anciently, the Chung Yung consisted of two p’ien, as appears from the History of Literature of the Han dynasty, but in the Li Chi we have only one p’ien, which Chu Hsi, when he made his “Chapters and Sentences,” divided into thirty-three chapters. The old Work in two p’ien is not to be met with now [4].’

These views are based on a misinterpretation of the entry in the

1 ���������������.

2 See the ���������������, art. ������.

3 ������������,������������������������,���������������,������������.

4 ������������,������������������,���������������,������������������,������������,���������������,���������������, ������������������,���������������������������������.

Catalogue. It does not speak of two p’ien of the Chung Yung, but of two p’ien of Observations thereon. The Great Learning carries on its front the evidence of being incomplete, but the student will not easily believe that the Doctrine of the Mean is so. I see no reason for calling its integrity in question, and no necessity therefore to recur to the ingenious device employed in the edition of the five ching published by the imperial authority of K’ang Hsi, to get over the difficulty which Wang Wei supposes. It there appears in two p’ien, of which we have the following account from the author of ‘Supplemental Remarks upon the Four Books:’— ‘The proper course now is to consider the first twenty chapters in Chu Hsi’s arrangement as making up the first p’ien, and the remaining thirteen as forming the second. In this way we retain the old form of the Treatise, and do not come into collision with the views of Chu. For this suggestion we are indebted to Lu Wang-chai’ (an author of