"Detailed Analysis of The Analects": For All Who Have Misinterpreted Confucius (17)
2006/10/30 15:20:18
The Master said: To abandon or indulge profit in one's conduct breeds much resentment.
Detailed explanation: This chapter — seven characters, not a single difficult one — yet for a thousand years, it has been wrongly interpreted. Virtually all interpretations follow Zhu Xi's Collected Commentaries on the Analects. Zhu Xi held that "fàng" means "to rely on." Under this interpretation, "fàng" would be read in the rising tone. And subsequently, nearly all interpretations became: "If all actions are aimed at pursuing profit, one will easily incur the resentment of others (or resentment will easily arise in one's own heart)." At most, "fàng" is interpreted as "to indulge," but the basic meaning remains the same — treating "profit" as something evil or as something that provokes "resentment."
Yet in reality, if "fàng" truly meant "to rely on," why not just use "yī" (rely on) directly? "Yī yú lì ér xíng, duō yuàn" — "To rely on profit in one's conduct breeds much resentment" — wouldn't that be clearer? Later literary critics developed the concept of the "poetic eye" — in great poetry, the poetic eye is irreplaceable. Just as in the famous line everyone knows, "The spring breeze has again turned the south bank of the Yangtze green" — this character "green" (lǜ) simply cannot be changed. In the Chinese language, no other character can substitute for it. Although the concept of the "poetic eye" did not exist in the era of The Analects, The Analects — the foremost book in the Chinese language — employs characters with the precision and irreplaceability befitting the foremost book. Consider this: even that monkey-in-a-crown Lü Buwei, who gathered a motley crew to compile the hodgepodge Lüshi Chunqiu, dared to boast "a thousand gold for a single character" — not a single character could be changed. How much more so for The Analects, the foremost book of the Chinese language?
"Fàng" should be read in the departing tone, encompassing the meanings of "to abandon" and "to indulge." Every reader is likely to ask: "abandoning" and "indulging" — don't these two meanings directly contradict each other? In this sentence, "abandoning" means not acting according to "profit." But if one doesn't act according to "profit," how can there be indulgence? And "indulging" means pursuing profit without restraint, acting with wanton abandon. But if one is pursuing profit without restraint, there's no question of "abandoning." What is "abandoned" cannot be "indulged"; what is "indulged" is not "abandoned." Abandoning profit and indulging profit — two extremes — how can they simultaneously appear in the interpretation of "fàng"? In fact, it is precisely because "fàng" contains these two seemingly opposite meanings that this character becomes the irreplaceable "poetic eye." The Analects, the foremost book of the Chinese language, demonstrates brilliance not only in its reasoning but even in such minute details as word choice — it can stand proudly above all ages. This character "fàng" absolutely qualifies as "one character containing the divine."
"To abandon or indulge profit in one's conduct breeds much resentment" — meaning that whether one abandons or indulges "profit" in one's conduct, the result is always "much resentment." In fact, people today should find this sentence especially easy to understand. During the era of planned economy, everything was about abandoning "profit" — and the result was "much resentment." In the era of market economy, it's about indulging "profit" — and the result is still "much resentment." The reasonableness and brilliance of this sentence can be readily seen from the comparison of these two eras. What is even more brilliant is that these two opposite situations are captured in a single character "fàng" — this is like Boya's "High Mountains and Flowing Water." The only pity is that for a thousand years, there has scarcely been a single kindred spirit who understood. This ID now reveals what predecessors never revealed — consider it playing the role of Ziqi for once.
Both the indulgence and the abandonment of "profit" are wrong. This is consistent with the spirit of the previous chapter's "Qi, with one transformation, would reach the level of Lu; Lu, with one transformation, would reach the Way." The "Qi" model represents the indulgence of "profit," while the "Lu" model represents the abandonment of "profit." Both violate the fundamental principle of the "Way of the Sage" — addressing goodness and evil simultaneously, equally emphasizing the civil and the martial, the so-called "one yin, one yang — the Way of civil and martial." Therefore, one must "Qi, with one transformation, reach Lu; Lu, with one transformation, reach the Way" — ultimately returning to the "Way of the Sage." Furthermore, "profit" (lì) does not merely refer to "benefits" or "interests" in the usual sense. "Benefits" is a later derivative meaning. The original meaning of "lì" is "sharp" or "keen." In a society of "people not understanding," "benefits" are certainly the sharpest thing of all, and the ultimate result is the appearance of "poverty and wealth." But more importantly, beyond its static expression as benefits, "lì" also manifests as a dynamic, directional tendency — here, its original meaning of "sharp" and "keen" comes through even more.
Even within a society of "people not understanding," there are gradations. "People not understanding" inevitably produces "resentment," but "less resentment" is always better than "more resentment." In modern terms, social contradictions being moderated is always preferable to social contradictions being intensified. "To abandon or indulge profit in one's conduct breeds much resentment" states a universal law of the "people not understanding" society: whether one abandons or indulges "profit" in one's conduct, "resentment" will increase, and social contradictions will ultimately intensify. And "profit" is always relative. From the perspective of the "poverty and wealth" appearance, the indulgence of "profit" for the "wealthy" often means the violation of "profit" for the "poor," and vice versa.
To realize "the poor do not flatter, the rich are not arrogant" — the state of "people not discriminating" — one absolutely must not violate the universal law of the "people not understanding" society: "To abandon or indulge profit in one's conduct breeds much resentment." One absolutely must not abandon or indulge "profit" in one's conduct. One must fully grasp the dynamics of "profit" — as the saying goes, use the blade without being cut by it. Only then is one qualified to discuss "non-discrimination" toward the various appearances of "poverty and wealth." Otherwise, if one cannot even grasp the direction of "profit," how can one "not discriminate" against the ultimate result — the various appearances of "poverty and wealth"? The noble person practicing the "Way of the Sage" must first be one who "knows people." If one is still in a state of "not understanding" oneself, how can one practice "non-discrimination" upon the appearance of "people not understanding"? "Not knowing a single thing is a scholar's shame" — without arming oneself as thoroughly as possible with the knowledge of this world, one has no standing to call oneself a Confucian scholar.
(To be continued)
Strict prohibition on plagiarism — violators will be prosecuted
Replies
缠中说禅 2006/10/30 17:33:53
[Anonymous] 老麻花
========
No problem.
缠中说禅 2006/10/30 17:34:20
[Anonymous] 王东坡
2006-10-30 16:34:00
The blogger doesn't just explain The Analects but also shares a great deal of ancient cultural knowledge. This is very good — please continue.
---------------
Will do.
缠中说禅 2006/10/30 17:35:02
[Anonymous] 不知之人
The idea of rearranging The Analects is particularly inspiring. The current edition is simply chaotic and disjointed. If reorganized according to a certain thread of thought — like "this ID's" approach — The Analects, with all its profound subtlety, would surely become coherent, interconnected, and shine with new brilliance!
Eagerly waiting...
============
Absolutely.
缠中说禅 2006/10/30 15:36:47
Continued announcement
If anyone finds their reply has been deleted, it was definitely done by Sina, either automatically or manually. This ID does not delete posts. Please avoid including links or sensitive words in your replies, and there should be no problems.