Chen Dai said to his teacher Mencius:
“You refuse to visit feudal lords – it seems overly modest, even petty.
If you’d just go see one once, at best you could implement the Kingly Way; at least, you might help him achieve hegemony.
And as the old saying goes: ‘Bend one chi (about a foot) to straighten one xun (eight chi, about eight feet or a fathom)’ – sacrifice a small principle for a greater good. Isn’t that acceptable?”
Mencius replied:
“Formerly, Duke Jing of Qi was hunting and sent a messenger with a pennon to summon the gamekeeper (Yu Ren). The man didn’t come, and the duke wanted to execute him.
Confucius praised this gamekeeper. Why? Because he would not go unless summoned properly.
If one rushes to see a lord without even being invited, what does that make one?
Moreover, ‘bend one chi to straighten eight’ is a utilitarian argument.
If we judge by profit alone, then what if bending eight chi to straighten just one – would that be acceptable too?
Let me tell another story:
Zhao Jianzi once ordered the master charioteer Wang Liang to drive for his favorite courtier, Xi, on a hunt. They hunted all day but caught nothing.
Xi complained, ‘He’s the worst driver in the world!’
When Wang Liang heard this, he said, ‘Let me try again.’
After much persuasion, Xi agreed. The next morning, they caught ten birds.
Xi now praised him: ‘He’s the best driver in the world!’
Zhao Jianzi said, ‘Then I’ll assign Wang Liang to drive for you permanently.’
But Wang Liang refused:
‘The first time, I drove according to proper form – so we caught nothing.
The second time, I used irregular tactics (underhand method) – and we succeeded instantly.
The Book of Songs says:
“The driver’s perfect skill displayed;
Each arrow flew and hit the mark.”I cannot bear to serve a petty man. I resign!’
Even a mere driver felt ashamed to lower himself to team up with a shooter who broke the rules –
even if it meant piling up mountains of game.
Should we Confucians, then, distort our principles just to please rulers?
And you are wrong: No one who bends himself can ever straighten others.”
陳代曰：「不見諸侯，宜若小然；今一見之，大則以王，小則以霸。且志曰：『枉尺而直尋』，宜若可為也。」
孟子曰：「昔齊景公田，招虞人以旌，不至，將殺之。志士不忘在溝壑，勇士不忘喪其元。孔子奚取焉？取非其招不往也，如不待其招而往，何哉？且夫枉尺而直尋者，以利言也。如以利，則枉尋直尺而利，亦可為與？昔者趙簡子使王良與嬖奚乘，終日而不獲一禽。嬖奚反命曰：『天下之賤工也。』或以告王良。良曰：『請復之。』彊而後可，一朝而獲十禽。嬖奚反命曰：『天下之良工也。』簡子曰：『我使掌與女乘。』謂王良。良不可，曰：『吾為之範我馳驅，終日不獲一；為之詭遇，一朝而獲十。《詩》云：「不失其馳，舍矢如破。」我不貫與小人乘，請辭。』御者且羞與射者比。比而得禽獸，雖若丘陵，弗為也。如枉道而從彼，何也？且子過矣，枉己者，未有能直人者也。」
Note
This passage from Mencius: Teng Wen Gong II records Mencius’s firm rejection of his disciple Chen Dai’s pragmatic suggestion, crystallizing the Confucian commitment to moral integrity over political expediency.
Rejecting utilitarian compromise
The proverb “bend one chi to straighten eight” reflects Warring States strategists’ ends-justify-means mentality. Mencius counters that once morality is subordinated to utility, there is no limit to compromise – today a foot, tomorrow a fathom. True righteousness requires means and ends to be equally virtuous.
The dignity of the scholar
The story of Duke Jing’s gamekeeper illustrates that even low-ranking officials must uphold ritual propriety. Mencius insists that scholars (Confucians) should only accept formal invitations from rulers – not self-promote – thereby preserving intellectual independence in an age of opportunistic lobbying.
Wang Liang’s moral stand
Wang Liang’s refusal to drive for an unprincipled hunter symbolizes that professional excellence must align with moral standards. His choice mirrors the Confucian belief: better to fail rightly than to succeed wrongly.
The primacy of self-cultivation
This maxim echoes Confucius’s “When the ruler is upright, all will follow without orders” (Analects 13.6) and the Great Learning’s “Cultivate the self as the root.” For Mencius, political transformation begins with the moral integrity of the agent – not tactical concessions.
Historical Context: Idealism amidst realpolitik
In an era when advisors like Su Qin, Zhang Yi and Shang Yang sold strategies for power, Mencius stood apart, refusing unsolicited audiences. His stance was not aloofness but a defense of the Dao against the tide of realpolitik.
The boundary between Principle and Expediency
Confucianism allows flexibility – but never at the cost of core values. As Zhu Xi later commented:
“Sages act variously – sometimes distant, sometimes close – but always where Righteousness resides.”
Chen Dai’s proposal crossed that line.
This dialogue affirms Mencius as the guardian of the Confucian Dao: better that the Way remain unrealized than be realized through crooked means.
Leave a Reply