Chunyu Kun asked Mencius:
“Is it true that, according to ritual propriety, men and women should not directly hand things to each other?”
Mencius replied:
“Yes, that is the rule of ritual propriety.”
Chunyu Kun then asked:
“But what if your sister-in-law falls into water – should you reach out your hand to pull her out?”
Mencius immediately answered:
“If you don’t rescue your drowning sister-in-law, you’re no better than a wolf!
‘Men and women do not exchange objects by hand’ – that is indeed ritual propriety;
but pulling her out when she’s drowning – that is expediency (moral discretion, contextual adaptation).”
Chunyu Kun pressed further:
“Today, the whole world is drowning in suffering – yet you, Master, do not reach out to save it. Why?”
Mencius responded:
“When the whole world is ‘drowning,’ we save it with the Dao (the Way);
when a sister-in-law drowns, we save her with our hands.Do you really expect me to ‘reach out my hand’ to save the entire world?”
淳于髡曰：「男女授受不親，禮與？」
孟子曰：「禮也。」
曰：「嫂溺則援之以手乎？」
曰：「嫂溺不援，是豺狼也。男女授受不親，禮也；嫂溺援之以手者，權也。」
曰：「今天下溺矣，夫子之不援，何也？」
曰：「天下溺，援之以道；嫂溺，援之以手。子欲手援天下乎？」
Note
This dialogue from Mencius: Li Lou I masterfully illustrates the Confucian dialectic between “jing” (constant principles) and “quan” (expediency, contextual flexibility), while clarifying Mencius’s vision of how true salvation is achieved.
Jing and Quan: Ethical principles meet Practical wisdom
“Jing” refers to enduring norms like gender separation in rituals, which maintain social order. “Quan” is the morally guided exception – such as saving a life – which overrides formal rules for a higher good. Confucianism is not rigid legalism; it allows principled flexibility in service of humanity.
“Saving with Hands” vs. “Saving with the Dao”
Chunyu Kun uses the drowning sister-in-law as a metaphor for a suffering world, challenging Mencius’s apparent inaction. Mencius counters: individual emergencies require immediate action; civilizational crises require systemic transformation through the Dao – i.e., benevolent governance, moral education, and just institutions.
A rebuttal to Pragmatism and Diplomatic realism
- As a famed rhetorician from the Jixia Academy, Chunyu Kun likely represented utilitarian or Legalist views that valued visible results.
- Mencius rejects short-term interventions, insisting that true rescue lies in changing hearts and systems, not merely managing symptoms.
Benevolent governance as Systemic rescue
For Mencius, “saving with the Dao” means:
Ensuring people have secure livelihoods (“fixed property” or “constant property”);
Establishing schools to teach filial piety and righteousness;
Guiding rulers to extend their innate compassion into policy.
This is slow but sustainable – unlike heroic individualism.
The role of the Confucian scholar
Unlike Warring States strategists who sought office to implement quick fixes, Mencius saw himself as a teacher of kings, not a technician of power. His duty was to uphold the Dao, even in obscurity.
The conflict between the two, Chunyu Kun and Mencius, was not personal enmity but a clash of governance philosophies. This divergence also reflected the vibrant intellectual energy of the “Hundred Schools of Thought” during the Warring States period.
During the Warring States period, the state of Qi aimed to enrich the country, strengthen its military, and dominate the feudal lords. Chunyu Kun’s utilitarian philosophy and flexible strategies perfectly aligned with the political ambitions of Qi’s rulers. Therefore, as a prominent minister serving under King Wei and King Xuan of Qi, Chunyu Kun remained highly active in Qi’s political arena for a long time.
A notable example is when he used the metaphor “a single cry to astonish the world” to awaken the pleasure-seeking King Wei of Qi. This prompted King Wei to devote himself to governance, reform the bureaucracy, and significantly enhance Qi’s national strength.
Chunyu Kun was also repeatedly entrusted with diplomatic missions to other states and never suffered humiliation, earning him recognition as Qi’s accomplished diplomatic envoy. During a mission to Wei, he learned that Sun Bin was being persecuted by Pang Juan and engineered a rescue operation. Sun Bin later performed extraordinary military feats for Qi.
Mencius, although he held a prestigious official post in Qi in name, was not genuinely trusted or empowered by the king and eventually left the Qi state.
Modern Relevance: Charity vs. Structural Change
Today, we face similar choices: direct aid (hand rescue) or advocacy for justice (Dao rescue). Mencius reminds us: both matter, but only systemic change rooted in ethical vision can truly “save the world.”
In essence, this exchange teaches: Principles guide us – but wisdom knows when and how to apply them; and real salvation begins not with hands, but with ideas that transform society.
Leave a Reply