The Analects

by Confucius

Concerning hsin there is one saying which is particularly interesting. Yu Tzu said, ‘To be trustworthy in word (hsin) is close to being moral in that it enables one’s words to be repeated’ (I.13). The tragedy of the boy who cried ‘Wolf!’ is that when he repeated his cry nobody took him seriously because he was not hsin on the previous occasions. Being trustworthy in word is close to being moral precisely beca...

But to say that trustworthiness in word is close to being moral is to say that the two are not identical. There are bound to be cases where an inflexible adherence to the principle of trustworthiness in word will lead to action that is not moral. Confucius describes ‘a man who insists on keeping his word and seeing ...

Second, there is ching (reverence). This is a rather ancient concept. In early Chou literature ching describes the frame of mind of a man taking part in a sacrifice. It is different from that shown in other religions. In other religions, there is fear and abject submission in face of the power of the deity. Ching, on the other hand, is born of the awareness of the immensity of one’s responsibility to promote the welfare of the common people. It is a combination of the fear of failing in the respons...

Ching, reverence, is to be distinguished from kung, respectfulness. The latter is a matter of visible appearance and manner. Kung is mostly mentioned in connection with the observance of the rites. For instance, the gentleman ‘is respectful towards others and observant of the rites’ (XII.5), and he is said to turn his thought to ‘appearing respectful when it comes to his demeanour’ (XVI.10),

This more or less completes the account of the major moral virtues which go into the make-up of the gentleman. I have, however, deliberately left yi to the end. Yi is a word which can be used of an act in which case it can be rendered as ‘right’, or it can be used of an act an agent ought to perform in which case it can be rendered as ‘duty’, or it can be used of an agent in which case it can be rendered as ‘righteous’ or ‘dutiful

Nevertheless, in this respect, yi is different from other moral words. Let us contrast it with benevolence, for instance. Of course an act as well as an agent can be described as benevolent, but benevolence is basically a character of agents and its application to acts is only derivative. A benevolent act is the act of a benevolent man. As a character of moral agents, benevolence has more to do with disposition and motive than objective circumstances.

It is here that the distinction between agent-ethics and act-ethics becomes relevant. Earlier we have said that Confucius was more interested in the moral virtues of men than in the moral qualities of their acts. But no moral system can be solely based on moral virtues, and Confucius’ system is no exception.

We have seen that in the question of self-interest, the opposition is between profit and rightness. Again, in the test whether courage is a virtue it is yi that is the standard. Although Confucius does not state it explicitly, one cannot help getting the impression that he realizes that in the last resort yi is the standard by which all acts must be judged while there is no further standard by which yi itself can be judged.

As we shall see, the object to be pursued in learning, in this context, is likely to have been the rites, and the rites, as rules of conduct, can, in the final analysis, only be based on yi. We can say, then, that in Confucius’ moral system, although benevolence occupies the more central position, yi is, nevertheless, more basic.

No account of the gentleman will be complete unless something is said about his attitude towards t‘ien (Heaven) and t‘ien ming (Heaven’s Decree), but this task turns out to present some difficulty. First, apart from t‘ien ming – literally Heaven’s command – ming is also used by itself, and there seems to be a basic difference between the two expressions.

The theory concerning the Decree of Heaven was, however, most probably an innovation on the part of the Duke of Chou. According to this theory, Heaven cares profoundly about the welfare of the common people and the Emperor is set up expressly to promote that welfare. He rules in virtue of the Decree of Heaven and remains Emperor only so long as he fulfils that purpose. As soon as he forgets his function and begins to rule for his own sake, Heaven will withdraw the Decree and bestow it on someone more worthy.

The only development by Confucius’ time was that the Decree of Heaven was no longer confined to the Emperor. Every man was subject to the Decree of Heaven which enjoined him to be moral and it was his duty to live up to the demands of that Decree. Confucius said, ‘At fifty, I understood (chih) t‘ien ming’ (II.4). This implies that t‘ien ming is something difficult to understand, but it also shows unmistakeably that it can be understood. The only other mention of t‘ien ming in the Analects is when Confucius said that it was one of the things the gentleman stood in awe of (XVI.8).

There is a remark by Mencius where Heaven and Destiny are also juxtaposed as synonyms which can serve as a gloss on these terms. Mencius said, ‘When a thing is done though by no one, then it is the work of Heaven; when a thing comes about though no one brings it about, then it is decreed’ (V.A.6).11 Thus there are certain things which are brought about, not by human agency, but by Destiny. These are things over which human endeavour has no effect. Whether or not a man is going to end up with wealth, honour and long life is due to Destiny. No amount of effort on his part will make any difference to the outcome. Thus, in the context of the fortunes of an individual, ming is his lot.

The reason why so much importance is attached to ming is this. If a man is convinced that all the desirable things in life are due to Destiny, he is more likely to see the futility of pursuing them and instead bend his efforts to the pursuit of morality. Morality is the only object a man ought to pursue because being moral lies in making just such an effort and not in the successful outcome of one’s action. This is the meaning of the saying, ‘A man has no way of becoming a gentleman unless he understands Destiny (chih ming)’ (XX.3).

To understand Heaven’s Decree is to understand why Heaven should so decree, but to understand Destiny is to know that certain things in life come under the sway of Destiny and that it is futile to pursue them.

The difference between t‘ien ming and ming can be summed up in this way. T‘ien ming, as moral imperative, is concerned with what man ought to do; ming, in the sense of Destiny, has to do with the bringing about of what comes to pass. T‘ien ming, necessarily difficult to understand is, nevertheless, understandable; ming is a total mystery. What t‘ien ming enjoins we ought to obey; what falls within the domain of ming we should leave alone.

The two remarks seem to me to be very different in meaning. In the latter case, Confucius was, in effect, saying, ‘What will be will be.’ In the former, however, he was saying that Heaven had endowed him with special virtue so that he could shoulder the t‘ien ming of awakening the Empire to its moral purpose and that if Huan T‘ui was allowed to kill him Heaven would be frustrating its own purpose.

Li pertains to ming and is, therefore, not a proper object of pursuit. Yi pertains to t‘ien ming and is, therefore, something we ought to follow.

So far we have only dealt with the moral qualities of the gentleman. To give these qualities their fullest realization the gentleman must take part in government. This, however, does not mean that the arduous process of self-cultivation is a mere means to the end of personal preferment. Hence, Confucius said, ‘It is not easy to find a man who can study for three years without thinking about earning a salary’ (VIII.12), and he showed approval when Min Tzu-ch‘ien considered himself not yet ready when offered a post (VI.9).

Study and the holding of office are the twin activities inseparable from the concept of the gentleman. ‘When a man in office finds that he can more than cope with his duties, then he studies; when a student finds that he can more than cope with his studies, then he takes office’ (XIX.13).

But that a man should have adequately prepared himself for office is not the only precondition for his actually taking office. The times must be right as well. For a man to be so keen that he is ready to take office whether order prevails in the state or not is condemned by Confucius. ‘It is shameful,’ he said, ‘to make salary your sole object, irrespective of whether the Way prevails in the state or not’ (XIV.1). The reason is that when the Way does not prevail in a state one can only stay in office by bending one’s principles.

If one does not do so one is liable to be putting oneself in danger. In such a situation, one’s only choice is to stay clear of trouble, devoting oneself to the pursuit of the highest moral standard in one’s life as a private citizen. Shih Yü was straight as an arrow whether the Way prevailed in the...

However, when the Way prevails in the state, it is not only one’s duty to take office, but the taking of office is the culmination of the years of preparation for just such an eventuality.

The ultimate purpose of government is the welfare of the common people (min). This is the most basic principle in Confucianism and has remained unchanged throughout the ages. The promotion of the welfare of the common people begins with satisfying their material needs. ‘Tzu-kung asked about government. The Master said, “Give them enough food” (XII.7). In order to achieve this aim, the labour of the common people must be employed in the right seasons (I.5), i.e., they must not be taken away from their work on the land during the busy seasons.

But besides the necessities of life, the common people must also be provided with sufficient arms. However, before they can be sent to war, they must also be given adequate training.

However, food and arms are not the most important things the people should have. Above all, they must have trust in the ruler and must look up to him. In answer to Tzu-kung’s question about government, Confucius said, ‘Give them enough food, give them enough arms and the common people will have trust in you.’

This emphasis on the moral basis of government is fundamental to Confucius’ teaching. He said, Guide them by edicts, keep them in line with punishments, and the common people will stay out of trouble but will have no sense of shame. Compulsion and punishment can, at best, ensure outward conformity. The common people will stay clear of trouble not because they are ashamed of doing wrong but because they fear punishment.

In contrast to this: Guide them by virtue, keep them in line with the rites, and they will, besides having a sense of shame, reform themselves. (II.3) When the people reform themselves and have a sense of shame, the law and its attendant threat of punishment need never be invoked.

Guidance by virtue, however, cannot be effective unless the ruler sets a moral example for his people. Here, perhaps, we should take note of the fact that the Chinese word cheng (to govern) and cheng (to correct) are cognate. Chi K‘ang Tzu asked Confucius about government. Confucius answered, ‘To govern (cheng) is to correct (cheng). If you set example by being correct, who would dare to remain incorrect?’ (XII.17) There is a positive and a negative point to this. The negative point is that if the ruler fails to be correct himself but insists on ...

The positive point is that the common people always look up to their betters and if those in position of authority set an example this will be imitated even if the people are not ordered to do so. This point comes out clearly in the following passage: The Master said, ‘If a man is correct in his own person, then there will be obedience without orders being given, but if he is...

Moral example is far more effective than edicts, and where edicts contradict the example, it is the example that the common people will heed rather than the edicts. This point is most persuasively put by Confucius on another occasion. Chi K‘ang Tzu asked Confucius about government, saying, ‘What would you think if, in order to move closer to those who possess the Way, I were to kill those who do not follow the Way?’ Confucius answered, ‘In administering your government, what need is there for you to kill? Just desire the good yourself and the common people will be good. Th...

Here, Confucius was talking about ‘the small man’ – who presumably enjoyed political power though he belonged to the class of the ruled – and not about the common people, but what is true of the small man will a fortiori be true of the common people. Moral example has an influence which, though imperceptible, is, in fact, irresistible. It is, therefore, of the greatest importance to put the upright in position of authority. In answer to the question put to him by Duke Ai, ‘What must I do before the common people will look up to me?’ Confucius said, ‘Raise the straight and set them over the c...

Since moral influence works in an imperceptible manner, the ideal ruler is often characterized not only as doing nothing but as appearing to the populace as having done nothing for which he could be praised. ‘The rule of virtue can be compared to the Pole Star which commands the homage of the multitude of stars without leaving its place’ (II.1).

The Taoist ruler genuinely does nothing because the Empire functions best when left alone. The Confucian ruler only appears to do nothing because the moral influence he exerts works imperceptibly.

We cannot leave the subject of government without discussing Confucius’ attitude towards the common people (min). He did not disguise the fact that, in his view, the common people were very limited in their intellectual capacity. He said, ‘The common people can be made to follow a path but not to understand it’ (VIII.9). They cannot understand why they are led along a particular path because they never take the trouble to study.

It is not surprising that Confucius should have taken such a view. Study, as conceived by Confucius, is an arduous process which is never accomplished. The common people are greatly handicapped. They rarely have the capacity and practically never the opportunity. When on the rare occasion they have both the capacity and the opportunity, they are unlikely to be able to put up with the hardship.

Perhaps, it is precisely because the people are incapable of securing their own welfare unaided that the ruler’s supreme duty is to work on their behalf in bringing about what is good for them. The common people should be treated with the same loving care given to babies who cannot fend for themselves.

This is stated in a memorable remark in the Book of History quoted by Mencius: the ancient rulers acted ‘as if they were tending a new-born babe’.13 Mencius describes such rulers as father and mother to the people. It is thus undeniable that Confucius advocated a strong paternalism in government and this remained unchanged as a basic principle throughout the whole history of Confucianism.

Finally, Confucius said that if he praised anyone, one might be sure that he had been put to the test. The test turns out to be the governing of the common people, for he went on to say, ‘These common people are the touchstone by which the Three Dynasties were kept to the straight path’ (XV.25). The sole test of a good ruler is whether he succeeds in promoting the welfare of the common people.

More is necessary if we are to have the perfect gentleman. In order to understand this, we must first take a look at a pair of terms, wen and ckih. Chih is the easier of the two to understand. It is the basic stuff or native substance a thing or a man is made of. Wen is more difficult to grasp because of its far-ranging application. In the first place wen signifies a beautiful pattern.

For instance, the pattern of the stars is the wen of heaven, and the pattern on the skin of a tiger is its wen. Applied to man, it refers to the beautiful qualities he has acquired through education. Hence the contrast to chih. What a man acquires through education covers a wide range of accomplishments. It includes skills like archery and charioteering, writing and mathematics, but the most important fields are literature and music, and conduct befitting the gentleman.

Thus wen is a word with a wide range of meanings covered by a variety of words in English, such as ornament, adornment, refinement, accomplishment, good breeding and culture.

It is not enough for a man to be born with good native substance. A long process of nurture is necessary to give him the breeding that is indispensable to the gentleman.

A man may have a strong urge to show respect towards another man in a given society, but unless he knows the code of behaviour by which this respect is given expression, he will either fail completely to express it or, at most, succeed only in expressing it in a manner not altogether acceptable in that society.

The shao was the music of Shun who, chosen for his virtue, succeeded to the throne through the abdication of Yao, while the wu was the music of King Wu who, in spite of his virtue, won the Empire only after resorting to force – hence the name wu ‘military force’. For this reason the former was not only perfectly beautiful but also perfectly good while the latter, though perfectly beautiful, left something to be desired in its goodness. That Confucius should consider the wu inferior to the shao is not surprising if we remember his abhorrence of force which was said to be among the things he never talked about (VII.21).

The Master praised Tzu-hsia for his understanding of the Odes because he saw that just as in a painting the colours are put in after the outline is sketched in white so the refinement of observing the rites is inculcated in a man who is already born with the right substance.14

‘Have you studied the Odes?’ ‘No.’ ‘Unless you study the Odes, you will be ill-equipped to speak’ (XVI.13). The Odes was an anthology every educated man was thoroughly acquainted with, so an apt quotation from it could be used to convey one’s meaning in polite or delicate situations. An ability to speak through the guise of a quotation was particularly useful in diplomatic exchanges. It is for this reason that Confucius said, ‘If a man who knows the three hundred Odes by heart … proves incapable of exercising his own initiative when sent to foreign states, then what use are the Odes to him, however many he may have learned?’ (XIII.5).

There is a further advantage. When one’s true meaning is couched in a quotation it is always possible for one to deny, at a subsequent date, that any such meaning was ever intended. For this reason, such practices have continued to the present day.

This is his concern with what might be described as matters of method. At the heart of this aspect of his teaching is the opposition between hsüeh (learning) and ssu (thinking). Before we can see the significance of this opposition we must, first of all, find out what constituted learning.

The reason is this. The verb ‘to learn’ needs an expressed object. For instance, we do not say, ‘He learns.’ We can, of course, say, ‘He learns quickly,’ or ‘He is willing to learn,’ but these are special cases where the focal point of the sentence is not in the word ‘learn’. We do, on the other hand, say, ‘He studies.’ There is, however, another difference between ‘learning’ and ‘studying’. We tend to ‘learn’ some things but ‘study’ others. For instance, a child learns to walk but an entomologist studies the behaviour of ants. We learn something practical; we study something theoretical. In learning the focus is on the learner; in studying the focus is on the subject. In learning something new, a man improves himself. He either acquires a new skill or. becomes more proficient in an old one. In studying, a man acquires new knowledge but this new knowledge need not make any difference to him as a practical man.