Mencius formally resigned his post (as guest minister in Qi state) and was preparing to return home.
The King of Qi visited him personally and said:
“Previously, I wished to see you but couldn’t. When we finally served together in court, I was overjoyed.
Now you’re leaving me again – will I ever have the chance to see you again?”
Mencius replied respectfully:
“It has always been my heartfelt wish, only I did not presume to ask.”
A few days later, the king said to his minister Shi Zi (Shizi):
“I’d like to grant Mencius a residence in the capital and provide him and his disciples with a stipend of ten thousand zhong of grain each year, so that all ministers and commoners may look up to him as a moral exemplar.
Could you please convey this offer to him?”
Shi Zi relayed the message through Chen Zi (Mencius’s disciple Chen Zhen), who then told Mencius.
Mencius responded:
“Alas! How can Shi Zi understand that this is simply impossible?
If I truly sought wealth, would I have turned down a hundred thousand zhong only to accept ten thousand? Is that what you call ‘desiring riches’?
This reminds me of Ji Sun’s criticism of Zishu Yi:
‘How strange is Zishu Yi! When he himself wasn’t appointed to govern (or he was never given significant assignments when he served as an official), he should have let it go – yet he arranged for his sons and disciples to become high ministers. Who doesn’t desire honor and wealth? But he alone insists on setting up a private monopoly within the realm of privilege.’
In ancient times, markets existed so people could exchange what they had for what they lacked, overseen fairly by officials.
But there was a despicable merchant who always seized the highest ground (i.e., a monopolistic vantage point), looked everywhere for any possible means to corner all market profits for himself.
Everyone despised him, so authorities began taxing him. The taxation of merchants began precisely with such petty monopolists.”
孟子致為臣而歸。王就見孟子，曰：「前日願見而不可得，得侍，同朝甚喜。今又棄寡人而歸，不識可以繼此而得見乎？」對曰：「不敢請耳，固所願也。」
他日，王謂時子曰：「我欲中國而授孟子室，養弟子以萬鍾，使諸大夫國人皆有所矜式。子盍為我言之？」
時子因陳子而以告孟子，陳子以時子之言告孟子。孟子曰：「然。夫時子惡知其不可也？如使予欲富，辭十萬而受萬，是為欲富乎？季孫曰：『異哉子叔疑！使己為政，不用，則亦已矣，又使其子弟為卿。人亦孰不欲富貴？而獨於富貴之中，有私龍斷焉。』古之為市也，以其所有易其所無者，有司者治之耳。有賤丈夫焉，必求龍斷而登之，以左右望而罔市利。人皆以為賤，故從而征之。征商，自此賤丈夫始矣。
Note
This passage from Mencius: Gongsun Chou II encapsulates the Confucian ideal of intellectual autonomy, moral integrity, and resistance to co-optation by power.
Rejecting Symbolic Co-optation
The king’s offer of “ten thousand zhong” was not genuine support for Mencius’s mission but an attempt to absorb him into the state apparatus as a decorative sage. Mencius saw through this: accepting would contradict his earlier rejections of even greater wealth and betray his role as an independent moral voice.
The metaphor of “Private Monopoly”
Borrowing the image of a greedy merchant monopolizing market profits, Mencius condemns those who, though personally unappointed, manipulate networks of kin or disciples to secure influence. True gentlemen, when unused by the state, withdraw – not scheme.
By this analogy, Mencius made clear: accepting the king’s generous offer would make him like that greedy trader – outwardly honored, yet inwardly compromised, trading moral independence for state patronage.
The unbuyable scholar
Echoing Confucius’s “Wealth and rank acquired unjustly are to me like floating clouds” (Analects 7.16), Mencius insists that the scholar’s duty is to “follow the Dao,” not serve rulers uncritically. His departure from Qi exemplifies the principle: better to be ignored than instrumentalized.
The trap of being a “Moral Exemplar”
While flattered as a model for the nation, Mencius recognized that state-sponsored veneration often silences dissent. Once institutionalized, he would lose the freedom to critique – precisely what made his teachings valuable.
Historical Context: The Warring States Dilemma
In an age when strategists sold their talents to the highest bidder, such as Su Qin, Zhang Yi, Shang Yang, etc. Mencius chose a harder path: unwavering commitment to benevolent governance, even at the cost of political irrelevance. His refusal preserved Confucianism’s critical edge for future generations.
Ultimately, Mencius defines the true Confucian scholar not as an official, but as a free conscience – one who teaches kings but never belongs to them.
Leave a Reply