Wan Zhang asked, “Why do scholars not attach themselves to feudal lords?”
Mencius replied, “They dare not do so. It is proper for a feudal lord who has lost his state to attach himself to another feudal lord; but for a scholar to attach himself to a feudal lord is improper.”
Wan Zhang asked, “If a ruler sends grain as a gift, may it be accepted?”
Mencius said, “It may be accepted.”
Wan Zhang asked, “What is the principle behind accepting it?”
Mencius said, “A ruler ought to provide relief to the common people who have migrated to his state.”
Wan Zhang asked, “Then why is it acceptable to accept relief, but unacceptable to accept a bestowed gift?”
Mencius said, “One dares not accept it.”
Wan Zhang asked, “May I ask why one dares not accept it?”
Mencius said, “Those who serve as gatekeepers or night watchmen have regular duties, and therefore they may properly receive provisions from their superiors. But to receive gifts from a superior without having regular duties is considered disrespectful.”
Wan Zhang asked, “If a ruler sends gifts, and they are accepted, may this practice be continued indefinitely?”
Mencius said, “When Duke Mu of Lu dealt with Zisi, he frequently sent inquiries and frequently sent gifts of cooked meat in a tripod. Zisi was displeased. In the end, he pushed the messenger out of the main gate, bowed his head to the north, kowtowed twice, and refused the gift, saying, ‘From now on, I know that the ruler treats me like a dog or a horse.’ After that, the officials ceased sending gifts. If one claims to love the worthy but neither promotes them nor supports them properly, can this truly be called loving the worthy?”
Wan Zhang asked, “May I ask how a feudal lord should support a gentleman so that it may be considered proper support?”
Mencius said, “The initial support should be delivered in the ruler’s name, and the gentleman should receive it with a bow and a kowtow. Afterward, the granary keeper should continue to supply grain, and the kitchen staff should continue to supply meat, without delivering them in the ruler’s name. Zisi considered the gifts of cooked meat inappropriate because they forced him to repeatedly bow in exhaustion, which is not the proper way to support a gentleman. When Yao dealt with Shun, he had his nine sons serve Shun, gave his two daughters to him in marriage, and provided him with all the officials, oxen, sheep, and granaries to support him in the fields. Later, he promoted him to a high position. Therefore, this is what is meant by a king or feudal lord truly honoring the worthy.”
Note
This passage from the Wan Zhang II chapter of the Mencius profoundly explores the independent personality of Confucian scholars, the boundaries of etiquette in ruler-minister relations, and the true essence of “honoring the worthy.” Drawing on historical context and traditional commentaries, we can understand its philosophy through the following dimensions:
- The Independent Personality of Scholars
Mencius begins by stating that “scholars do not attach themselves to feudal lords,” establishing the political independence of ancient intellectuals. Under the patriarchal feudal system, it was proper for a feudal lord who lost his state to seek refuge with another, but scholars, as a group possessing independent morality and knowledge, must never attach themselves to the powerful like retainers or guests. This “non-attachment” is the bottom line for scholars to maintain their personal dignity and avoid becoming mere appendages to power. - The Boundary Between “Relief” and “Bestowed Gifts”
Mencius cleverly distinguishes between “relief” (zhou) and “bestowed gifts” (ci). A ruler providing relief to migrating commoners is an expression of universal benevolent governance, and as a commoner, a scholar may naturally accept it. However, if a scholar accepts private gifts from a ruler without holding a specific official position (no regular duties), it violates the principle of corresponding rights and responsibilities and is deemed “disrespectful.” Confucianism holds that the only legitimate way for scholars to acquire material compensation is by fulfilling public duties (such as being a gatekeeper or night watchman), which fundamentally prevents patronage and private favoritism, maintaining political integrity. - The True Meaning of “Honoring the Worthy”
Using the story of Zisi refusing Duke Mu of Lu’s frequent gifts of cooked meat, Mencius sharply satirized the hypocritical trend of “honoring the worthy” among contemporary feudal lords. Zisi angrily pointed out that frequent, trivial private favors would only exhaust the worthy with endless bowing, treating them no better than dogs or horses. Mencius then proposed the true standard for honoring the worthy, using Emperor Yao’s treatment of Shun as the ultimate model: providing comprehensive material support (officials, oxen, sheep, and granaries) and, more importantly, granting actual political power (promoting him to a high position). This demonstrates that the Confucian advocacy for honoring the worthy is never about superficial material handouts, but must be realized through the practical political endeavor of “practicing the Way and saving the world.”
萬章曰：「士之不託諸侯，何也？」 孟子曰：「不敢也。諸侯失國，而後託於諸侯，禮也；士之託於諸侯，非禮也。」 萬章曰：「君餽之粟，則受之乎？」 曰：「受之。」 「受之何義也？」 曰：「君之於氓也，固周之。」 曰：「周之則受，賜之則不受，何也？」 曰：「不敢也。」 曰：「敢問其不敢何也？」 曰：「抱關擊柝者，皆有常職以食於上。無常職而賜於上者，以為不恭也。」 曰：「君餽之，則受之，不識可常繼乎？」 曰：「繆公之於子思也，亟問，亟餽鼎肉。子思不悅。於卒也，摽使者出諸大門之外，北面稽首再拜而不受。曰：『今而後知君之犬馬畜伋。』蓋自是臺無餽也。悅賢不能舉，又不能養也，可謂悅賢乎？」曰：「敢問國君欲養君子，如何斯可謂養矣？」 曰：「以君命將之，再拜稽首而受。其後廩人繼粟，庖人繼肉，不以君命將之。子思以為鼎肉，使己僕僕爾亟拜也，非養君子之道也。堯之於舜也，使其子九男事之，二女女焉，百官牛羊倉廩備，以養舜於畎畝之中，後舉而加諸上位。故曰：王公之尊賢者也。」
Leave a Reply