by Confucius
The Han text Summary of the Discussions in the White Tiger Hall (Baihutong) says that “this conversation must have taken place after the eleventh year of Duke Ai [484 BC],” after Confucius had come home from his travels. Liu Baonan agrees, saying that after his return to Lu Confucius still “wanted to know about the goings-on in his government but he refused to pursue any official position,” which was the reason why someone asked him this question. According to the history in the Zuo Commentary, Confucius was welcomed back to Lu as the “elder statesman” (guolao). The ruler, Duke Ai, and the chief counselor, Ji Kangzi, went to him for advice, but he was no longer interested in taking up a government office. Liu Baonan also argues that it was not a coincidence that the conversation in 2.21 followed Confucius’ talk with Duke Ai in 2.19 and with Ji Kangzi in 2.20.
2.22 The Master said, “If a person does not have the trust of others, I don’t see how he can get anywhere. A large cart without a linchpin in its yoke bar and a small cart without a linchpin in its collar bar—how can you get them to go anywhere?”
Either a large cart drawn by oxen or a small cart drawn by horses, without a linchpin in its yoke or collar bar, simply could not perform its function. It is the same with words that no one trusts, Gu Menglin says, “they have no vehicle to put them into motion.”
2.23 Zizhang asked, “Can we know what things will be like ten generations from now?”
The Master said, “The Yin followed the rites of the Xia, and what was added and subtracted can be known. The Zhou followed the rites of the Yin, and what was added and subtracted can be known. Whoever succeeds the Zhou, even a hundred generations from now, will be able to know [what was added and subtracted from the rites of the Zhou].”
An alternative translation of the last sentence is: “Whoever succeeds the Zhou, we are able to know what things will be like even a hundred generations from now.” The two readings reflect the two sides of a debate: Is Confucius stressing the importance of studying the past? Or is he saying that it is possible to predict the future? The Song scholar Hu Anguo and the Qing scholar Chen Feng prefer the first reading, and most of the Han scholars prefer the second. Hu Anguo says that Confucius did not really answer Zizhang’s question about whether it was possible to know the future because he was more interested in the past. This, I feel, agrees with the Confucius we find in the Analects—someone who used history to elucidate his teachings. It also concurs with Sima Qian’s understanding of this passage in his biography of Confucius, which says, “Confucius pursued the study of the rites of the Three Dynasties. He compiled and edited all the events related to this subject, noting what was added and subtracted from the rites after the Yin succeeded the Xia so that these things can be known even a hundred generations from now.” This, of course, represents the historian’s interpretation and is the one I favor.
Even though traditional scholars cannot agree on how to read the last sentence of 2.23, they all seem to think that Confucius’ response to Zizhang is about the relationship of constancy and change. The constants are those principles in human relationship—humaneness and rightness, for instance—that rely on the rites for support and fulfillment. “Change” refers to ritual implements and clothing, standards of weights and measurement, minor rules and regulations—things that could vary because of practical considerations and changing customs. Confucius’ point in 9:3 is an example.
2.24 The Master said, “To offer sacrifice to spirits who are not your ancestors is ingratiating. Faced with what is right yet doing nothing about it shows a lack of courage.”
Han scholars question the intent of those who sacrifice to spirits that are not their ancestors. “This is flattery,” Zheng Xuan writes. “Those who make such sacrifices are bribing the spirits, [any spirits], to seek their blessing.” Such conduct is “contrary to the rites,” He Xiu says, and so “no blessing could be conferred.” Liu Baonan cites 3.6 as an example of the Jisun family behaving obsequiously by performing a sacrifice they were not entitled to and of Ran Qiu behaving in a cowardly way by doing nothing to stop a performance he knew to be contrary to the rites.
BOOK THREE
3.1 Confucius said of the Ji [Jisun] family: “They have eight rows of dancers to perform in their courtyard. If this can be tolerated, what cannot be tolerated?”
The Han scholar Ma Rong, with the support of the early texts, explains that according to the ritual guidelines of the Zhou, the Son of Heaven was entitled to have eight rows of eight dancers perform in the courtyard of his ancestral temple, the regional rulers six rows of eight, the chief counselors four rows of eight, the salaried officials two rows of eight. The head of the Ji family was only a chief counselor in the service of the regional ruler, yet he had eight rows of dancers. One could say that his extravagant display showed only a lack of restraint, but Confucius regarded the ritual violation as a sign of the decline of the Zhou and of the collapse of her fengjian political system. Records in the Zuo Commentary suggest that Confucius was right: in 562 BC, eleven years before Confucius was born, the Jisuns appropriated the state army for the private use of their family and two other families with hereditary status; and by the time Confucius returned home from his journey in 484, the Jisuns were collecting more land taxes than the ruler of Lu.
3.2 The Three Families had the yong ode performed when the sacrificial vessels were being cleared away. The Master said,
“‘Assisting are the great lords,
The Son of Heaven, solemn and dignified.’
What significance could there be when these lines are sung in the halls of the Three Families?”
The yong (Ode 282) is found in the Zhousong (“Hymns of the Zhou”) section of the Book of Poetry. Confucius’ remark here should be read with that in 3.1, since both refer to the ritual violations of the hereditary families. “The Three Families” refers to the Jisuns, the Shusuns, and the Mengsuns, the three hereditary families in the state of Lu. The families were created about a hundred years before Confucius was born, as a desperate measure to address a succession crisis. Over the course of three years, from 662 to 659 BC, three brothers of a recently deceased ruler, Duke Zhuang, were deadlocked over the question of who should be his heir. In the end, the oldest of the three, also the most powerful, forced the middle brother to commit suicide but offered to make his family hereditary, so that this man “would always have descendants in Lu.” This was how the Shusuns came into being. The youngest brother was tougher. After he had eliminated the two young rulers his oldest brother had helped to install, he was driven out of Lu, and, with nowhere to go, he, too, took his own life. After he died, the state of Lu guaranteed a permanent home and hereditary status for his descendants. This was the beginning of the Mengsun family. The winner of this political struggle, Jiyou, after his brothers died, also instituted a hereditary slot for his family, the Jisuns.
3.3 The Master said, “Being human and yet lacking humaneness—what can such a man do with the rites? Being human and yet lacking humaneness—what can such a man do with music?
The sixth-century scholar Huang Kan suggests that 3.3 should be considered together with 3.1 and 3.2 as a critique of the conduct of the Three Families. Yet I prefer to give it a broader reading, seeing it as the foundation of Confucius’ teaching of the rites (li)—that the rites have no relation to a person who lacks moral impulse. The Book of Rites offers another way of looking at this relationship. It says, “The rites embody the countenance—and are the manifestation—of humanity. Music represents its harmony.”
3.4 Lin Fang asked about the working principle of the rites. The Master said, “An admirable question indeed! With regard to the rites as a whole, it is better to err on the side of being frugal than on that of being extravagant. With regard to the mourning rites, it is better to err on the side of showing too much emotion than on that of fussing over every detail.”
Most scholars feel that the conversation between Confucius and Lin Fang, a ritual expert from Lu, is about the relationship of wen and zhi: refine
ment and natural proclivities, cultural form and innate character. Liu Baonan refers to Xunzi and the Book of Rites on this subject. Xunzi says, in “A Discussion of Heaven,” that the rites are meant to help a person “find balance” “in the tug between the call for refinement and his natural proclivities.” The Book of Rites says, “The rites in practice do not remain the same [they change with the circumstances]. By aiming to find the point where there is neither too much nor too little, they allow a person to hold on to his feelings and yet to be safe from the perils of excess.” But here Confucius tells Lin Fang, if the balance is difficult to achieve, it is better to err on the side of “being frugal” and “showing too much emotion.” This, too, is “the working principle of the rites.”
3.5 The Master said, “The Yi and Di tribes with their rulers are not like the Chinese states, which have none.”
An alternative reading is: “The Yi and Di tribes with their rulers are still inferior to the Chinese states, which have none.” This is also the reading found in most of the English translations. Chinese scholars, however, are divided on the question of whether Confucius was belittling the Yi and Di or the Chinese states. The Tang–Song scholar Xing Bing, for instance, understands Confucius as saying: “Even though the Yi and Di tribes have their rulers, their conduct is not guided by the rites and they have no sense of rightness; even though the Chinese states, at times, are without their rulers, they have not abandoned the practice of the rites and they have a sense of rightness.” The Song thinker Cheng Yi, however, feels differently. He believes that Confucius’ utterance is a critique of the behavior of the Chinese—that “even the Yi and Di people have their elders and rulers, which is unlike the Chinese, who, in a state of disorder, are no longer making distinctions between above and below, superior and inferior.” Two eminent Ming-Qing thinkers, Gu Yanwu and Wang Fuzhi, seem to agree with Cheng Yi’s interpretation, and because these two men lived through a foreign conquest, it is possible, I feel, to understand their reading as a critique of the Ming, of the Chinese dynasty that was toppled in 1644.
3.6 The head of the Jisun family was getting prepared to make a sacrifice to Mount Tai. The Master said to Ran Qiu, “Can you stop him from going ahead with it?”
Ran Qiu said, “I cannot.”
The Master said, “Alas! Who would have thought that the spirit of Mount Tai would know less about the rites than Lin Fang?”
Ran Qiu was a disciple of Confucius and a war hero; he was also a chief retainer in the Jisun family. He was probably the person who persuaded the ruler of Lu, Duke Ai, to invite Confucius to come home. Yet Confucius was not kind in his judgment of this disciple because Ran Qiu lacked moral courage. 3.6 is an example. Here Confucius asks Ran Qiu to stop the head of the Jisuns from performing a ritual that is the prerogative of his ruler. Ran Qiu responds: There is nothing I can do. To which Confucius says: In that case, the spirit of the mountain, being even more perceptive than a ritual expert like Lin Fang, would know the performance to be fraudulent and would not accept the sacrificial offering. Liu Baonan in his commentary suggests that we use 3.6 as a gloss of 2.24.
3.7 The Master said, “Gentlemen have no reason to contend. But, of course, there is the archery contest. Yet on such occasions, they bow and yield to each other as they ascend the steps to the hall; afterward, they descend the steps and drink together. Even when they compete, they are gentlemanly.”
Chinese moral philosophers like to use archery as a trope for their teachings because the archer aims for the bull’s-eye, a point that suggests the right balance in conduct and an upright character. The contest to be the best archer is also a gentlemanly activity because it is a test of one’s own skill that does not involve any aggressive move in the game. The early ritual texts also gave the archery contest a political context, saying that when the king was about to make a sacrifice, the feudal lords were asked to recommend their own officials to take part in the occasion, and that the king would then stage an archery contest for the selection process. Here Confucius first says, “Gentlemen have no reason to contend.” But then he remembers that they do compete in archery contests. Even so, he stresses, the rituals that guide them through the process can never lead them astray. Mencius, in the fourth century BC, takes the idea of archery to another level, seeing it as a pedagogical device and as a metaphor for moral cultivation.
3.8 Zixia asked, “What is the meaning of these lines: ‘Her entrancing smile, dimpling, / Her beautiful eyes so animated and clear. / White renders the colors vibrant and distinct’?”
The Master said, “White is applied after the colors are put in.”
“Does the practice of the rites, in a like manner, come afterward?”
The Master said, “It’s you who have drawn my attention to such a reading. Only with you do I feel I can discuss the Odes.”
Of those three lines Zixia quotes from Ode 57, only the first two survived in the received version of the Book of Poetry. Yet the third line is most important, for it is the subject of Zixia’s conversation with Confucius and a topic of much debate among the later scholars. My reading follows that of the Han and of such Qing scholars as Dai Zhen, Ling Tingkan, and Liu Baonan. Yang Guishan and Zhu Xi of the Song, however, propose another reading of the poem and of Confucius’ response to Zixia. First we have Zixia’s question: “What is the meaning of these lines, ‘Her entrancing smile, dimpling, / Her beautiful eyes so animated and clear. / Distinct colors upon a white background’?” To which Confucius replies, “Painting the colors comes after the white background.” The difference between these two interpretations, as several Qing scholars point out, lies in how one perceives a person’s natural state—whether it is rich and variegated or plain and innocent. If one’s natural state is rich and variegated, as the Han scholars argue, then “the white” in the poem refers to a technique described in an early work on artisans, the Kaogongji, which says that white paint is applied with a thin brush “in between the colors to create a pattern.” This technique could be compared to the practice of the rites because the rites are able to bring out the brilliance in what is inborn by giving it a distinction and a measure of integrity. And “in the case of a woman endowed with natural charm and beauty,” one Han scholar says, “she would need the practice of the rites to perfect them.”
Scholars in the West tend to follow the Song reading, seeing “the white” as the plain and immaculate background (and Confucius’ idea of human nature), and “colors” as the richness and refinement that ritual practice can bring to a life that is pure at the beginning. I find this interpretation to be more a reflection of the moral agendas of the Song Confucians than what Confucius taught about the rites. And why does Confucius say to Zixia, “Only with you do I feel I can discuss the Odes”? This is because in Confucius’ response to the question he had asked about a poem, Zixia saw for himself the relevance this answer had in relation to the practice of the rites. It was, therefore, Zixia who drew his teacher’s attention to such a reading. Confucius says the same about Zigong in 1.15, where Zigong is able to use a poem to gloss an idea the two have been discussing regarding the rites.
3.9 The Master said, “I am able to speak about the rites of the Xia, but the state of Qii is not able to provide the evidence to illuminate what I say. I am able to speak about the rites of the Shang, but the state of Song is not able to provide the evidence to illuminate what I say. This is because both the records and worthy men of erudition are insufficient in these two states. If they were [more plentiful], I could support my words with evidence.”
The state of Qii was where descendants of the Xia were enfeoffed after the people of the Shang overthrew their dynasty. The state of Song was where the descendants of the Shang were enfeoffed after the people of the Zhou overthrew the Shang. Here Confucius makes a forceful statement about the importance of keeping records and having men of integrity be in charge of them, without which someone like himself, with a vast knowledge of the rites, simply cannot support what he says with evidence. S
ome scholars say that Confucius’ remark was probably directed at the Lu rulers, who, being the descendants of one of the principal founders of the Zhou (the Duke of Zhou), should learn from this lesson and become responsible guardians of the Zhou culture.
3.10 The Master said, “As for the di sacrifice, after the libation, I have no wish to observe the rest of the ceremony.”
According to Liu Baonan, the pouring of libationary wine to entice the spirit of the first progenitor to descend to the ancestral hall “should have occurred at the start of the di sacrifice.” And for Confucius to say that he wished to leave when the ceremony had just begun must have meant that he disapproved of the way the di sacrifice was conducted in the state of Lu—that in his view “the performance was against the spirit of the rites.” But what is the di sacrifice? Most of the knowledge that we have about this ritual comes from three chapters of the Book of Rites: “Record of Minor Points Concerning the Mourning Dress,” “The Great Treatise,” and “A Summary Account of Sacrifices.” All three point out that the di was “a grand sacrifice”—that “only a king could perform the di” for “the first progenitor of his ancestral line.” Yet this ceremony was allowed in Lu, and in no other regional state, because the Duke of Zhou, whose son was enfeoffed in Lu, had accomplished so much for the Zhou dynasty as the regent to his young nephew King Cheng that after he died King Cheng decided to bestow on the state of Lu “the right to perform the di sacrifice” in order to honor this man.
3.11 Someone asked for an explanation of [the basis of] the di sacrifice. The Master said, “This is not something that I know. The person who knows it will be able to handle all the affairs in the world as easily as having them placed right here,” and he pointed to his palm.
