After Mencius left Qi state, a man named Yin Shi remarked to others:
“If Mencius didn’t realize that the king could never become another Tang or Wu (the sage-kings), then he’s foolish;
but if he did know it was impossible, yet still came – then he was merely seeking favor and wealth.
He traveled a thousand miles to see the king, and when unappreciated, he left – that’s understandable.
But why did he linger for three nights in Zhou before departing? Such hesitation is puzzling!
This truly displeases me.”
Gao Zi heard this and told Mencius.
Mencius replied:
“How can Yin Shi possibly understand me?
Coming a thousand miles to see the king was what I truly desired – hoping he might practice benevolent governance.
But leaving because my Way was not realized – was that what I wanted? I had no choice!
I stayed three nights in Zhou before leaving – and even then, in my heart, I felt I was leaving too soon.
I kept thinking: perhaps the king would change his mind.
If he did, he would surely send for me to return.
Only after I left Zhou and saw that the king never sent anyone to recall me did I finally resolve firmly to go home.
Even so, have I ever truly abandoned the king?
The king still has full capacity to do good!
If he employed me, it wouldn’t just bring peace to Qi’s people – all the people under heaven would find peace!
I keep hoping he’ll change. I wait for it every day.
Do you think I’m some petty man (petty scholar) who, when his advice is rejected, flies into a rage, shows resentment on his face, and flees as fast as possible – as if racing against the sun to find lodging?”
When Yin Shi later heard this, he said remorsefully:
“I am truly a petty person!”
孟子去齊。尹士語人曰：「不識王之不可以為湯武，則是不明也；識其不可，然且至，則是干澤也。千里而見王，不遇故去。三宿而後出晝，是何濡滯也？士則茲不悅。」
高子以告。曰：「夫尹士惡知予哉？千里而見王，是予所欲也；不遇故去，豈予所欲哉？予不得已也。予三宿而出晝，於予心猶以為速。王庶幾改之。王如改諸，則必反予。夫出晝而王不予追也，予然後浩然有歸志。予雖然，豈舍王哉？王由足用為善。王如用予，則豈徒齊民安，天下之民舉安。王庶幾改之，予日望之。予豈若是小丈夫然哉？諫於其君而不受，則怒，悻悻然見於其面。去則窮日之力而後宿哉？」
尹士聞之曰：「士誠小人也。」
Note
This passage from Mencius: Gongsun Chou reveals the Confucian ideal of moral perseverance, compassionate hope, and transcendent political commitment.
Departure as reluctant necessity
Mencius frames his exit not as rejection but as last resort. His arrival was driven by hope; his departure, by despair over unrealized potential – not personal grievance.
The Three Nights in Zhou: The heart of benevolence
Yin Shi sees delay as weakness; Mencius sees it as reluctance to abandon hope. Like Confucius lingering when leaving Lu, the true sage departs with sorrow, not scorn.
Faith in the King’s moral capacity
Rooted in his doctrine of innate goodness, Mencius insists the king “has sufficient capacity to do good.” His persistence reflects belief in human perfectibility – even in rulers.
Rejecting the “Petty Man” mentality
Mencius scorns emotional, ego-driven politics. He criticized those petty men (petty scholars, or petty Confucian), who, when their advices are rejected, fly into a rage, show resentment on their face, and flees as fast as possible. The noble scholar remains calm, principled, and future-oriented – never letting rejection turn into bitterness.
Historical Context: Mencius’s frustrated mission in Qi
Despite holding high office, Mencius failed to sway Qi’s militaristic policies. Yet his departure was neither cynical nor hasty. It embodied the Confucian balance: firm in principle, gentle in hope, steadfast in universal concern.
Ultimately, this episode defends the moral dignity of the scholar: to leave a ruler is not to forsake him, but to preserve the possibility of his redemption.
Mencius left Qi twice
The First Departure (during the reign of King Wei of Qi)
Mencius advocated that “benevolent governance is invincible,” but King Wei of Qi prioritized Legalist strategies for strengthening the military (such as employing Sun Bin) and showed little interest in Confucian thought. Feeling disheartened and unrecognized, Mencius even refused a generous gift of one hundred gold pieces from the king and eventually departed.
The Second Departure (during the reign of King Xuan of Qi)
Although treated with respect, Mencius found that King Xuan regarded Confucian teachings as “empty talk” while actively pursuing expansionist policies. Key conflicts included:
- The Yan State Incident: After Qi troops captured Yan, they committed killings and plunder. Mencius advised King Xuan to help them install a new ruler and then withdraw the army to win the people’s support, but the king, coveting Yan’s territory, refused. The result was a rebellion in Yan, a coalition of states attacking Qi, and a devastating defeat for Qi. This left Mencius deeply disillusioned.
- A Fundamental Clash of Ideals: King Xuan aimed for “wealth and military power,” while Mencius advocated “protecting the people to achieve true kingship.” Though the king showed superficial respect, he never genuinely implemented benevolent governance.
The final struggle before leaving
Upon reaching the border town of Zhou, Mencius intentionally stayed for three days, hoping King Xuan would recall him. Although the king sent an envoy to persuade him to stay, he never demonstrated sincere commitment. After expressing his grievances clearly, Mencius ultimately left Qi for good.
Leave a Reply