Detailed Analysis of "The Analects": For All Those Who Misinterpret Confucius (30)

2006/11/15 12:05:10

The Master said: Do not be troubled that people do not understand oneself; be troubled that people are unable to understand oneself.

Yang Bojun: Confucius said: Don't worry that others don't understand me. Only worry that I myself lack ability. Qian Mu: The Master said: Don't fret that others don't know me. Fret about my own lack of capability. Li Zehou: Confucius said: Don't worry that people don't know you. Only worry that you yourself don't have talent.

Detailed explanation: The above three interpretations are largely the same. In fact, to put it more vividly, they essentially mean "good wine needs no bush" — in modern society, the absurdity and impracticality of such an interpretation hardly needs further comment. Interpretations like these can only produce rotten Confucians. Setting aside the absurdity of their interpretations, from a purely grammatical standpoint, there are two questions that cannot be evaded: First, does "其" refer to "人" (others) or "己" (oneself)? Second, is "能" a noun or a verb?

For the first question, all three assume "其" refers to "己," treating "其" as "oneself." But when "其" serves as a pronoun, it generally indicates a third-person possessive relationship. Translating "其" as "oneself" is not entirely impossible, but why shouldn't "其" refer to "人," which is grammatically more appropriate in both function and position? For the second question, "能" as a noun is fine, but here it makes more sense as a verb. Anyone familiar with the symmetrical rhetorical style of classical Chinese should know that "不患人之不己知，患其不能也" (do not be troubled that people do not know oneself; be troubled by their inability) is actually an abbreviation of "不患人之不己知，患人之不能己知也" (do not be troubled that people do not know oneself; be troubled that people are unable to know oneself). Correspondingly, "能" should more properly be a verb here. Therefore, this chapter should be interpreted as: "Do not be troubled that people do not understand oneself; be troubled that people are not able to understand oneself." Here, "人" (people) includes both oneself and others.

First, consider the case where "人" refers to oneself. Not understanding oneself — this is the normal state of being human. Moreover, as long as one is human, this state can never be completely changed. And this is nothing to fear. What is fearful is when people are unable to continually understand themselves — muddled for a lifetime, and proud of their muddle-headedness, either arrogantly self-aggrandizing or pathologically self-deprecating, losing the desire and possibility of understanding themselves. This is the greatest misfortune of human life. For a person, the primary task is to continually understand oneself. The so-called "Inner Sageliness," the so-called self-cultivation, is also about continually understanding oneself.

Now consider the case where "人" refers to others. Others not understanding oneself — and conversely, oneself not understanding others; people not understanding each other — from the perspective of "family, state, and all under heaven," this is a very common problem, and also a very normal one. Because individuals occupy different positions within the social structure, misunderstandings and failures of understanding naturally arise due to differences in interests and other factors. This is perfectly normal and nothing to fear. But what is fearful is when people are unable to continually understand each other, and indeed actively create chasms between themselves — you are the "elite," he is the "commoner," this one is "rich," that one is "poor" — causing irreparable fractures in the social structure, where people in society lose the desire and possibility of mutual understanding. This is the greatest misfortune of society. The primary task of society is continual mutual understanding. The so-called "Outer Kingliness," the so-called "bringing order to the family and bringing peace to all under heaven" — the foremost requirement is for people to continually understand each other. Without people continually understanding each other, how could there be a world where "people are not resentful"?

So then, what is the relationship between the "不患" (not-troubled/not-dread) and "患" (troubled/dread) discussed in this chapter and those in the previous chapter? In fact, the previous chapter addressed a fundamental question. From the ultimate perspective, all existence has its "患," and "患" takes position through the positionlessness of "不患." But the so-called ultimate is also relative. Within a specific system of existence, there are correspondingly its own "患" and "不患." What seems to be the positionless "不患" in one system becomes "患" in another system; conversely, what is "患" in one system becomes "不患" in another. Every real system of existence has its own "患" and "不患."

What this chapter explores is precisely the question of "患" and "不患" within the system of human society. From the perspective of human society, for the individual, not understanding oneself is "不患." In the absolute sense, one can never completely understand oneself. The so-called understanding is always understanding relative to the eternal non-understanding. "Non-understanding" is without position/rank, while "understanding" takes position through "non-understanding." When we say a certain person has self-awareness, or a certain person lacks self-awareness, it is precisely because of the positionless nature of "non-understanding" that the positions of having self-awareness and lacking self-awareness emerge. From there, self-awareness can be further differentiated into grades and ranks. Therefore, what one should be "troubled" about is not the positionless nature of not understanding oneself, but rather using this positionlessness as an excuse to claim that since one can never completely understand oneself, one might as well be arrogantly self-aggrandizing or pathologically self-deprecating, losing the desire and possibility of continually understanding oneself. What such people fail to realize is that precisely because of the positionless nature of "non-understanding," there exist the various positions of continually "understanding" oneself — and therefore the possibility of "understanding." Without grasping this point, one cannot possibly understand what "Inner Sageliness" means.

Similarly, from the perspective of human society, between people, people not understanding each other is "不患." In the absolute sense, people can never understand each other. The so-called "understanding" is always understanding relative to the eternal "non-understanding." "Non-understanding" is without position, while "understanding" takes position through "non-understanding." Therefore, what one should be "troubled" about is not the positionless nature of people not understanding each other, but rather using this positionlessness as an excuse to claim that since people can never completely understand each other, one might as well deliberately create chasms between people, causing irreparable fractures in the social structure, where everyone loses the desire and possibility of understanding others. What such people fail to realize is that precisely because of the positionless nature of "non-understanding," there exist the various positions of people "understanding" each other — and therefore the possibility of continual "understanding." Without grasping this point, one cannot possibly understand what "Outer Kingliness" means.

What is "能" (ability/capability)? In modern terminology, it means having the subjective and objective conditions in place. From "unable" to "able" means continually creating the conditions — making the subjective and objective conditions available. For any real society, any real person, "人之不己知" (people not understanding oneself) is an absolute fate — it is without position, without condition. And precisely because of this, there comes the possibility of creating various subjective and objective conditions so that this positionless "人之不己知" continually manifests different positions of "人之己知" (people understanding oneself), thereby realizing the continual elevation of position from "unable" to "able." This is the wellspring of the ceaseless vitality of human society. This is the meaning of "天行健" (Heaven moves vigorously). Without understanding this point, one cannot comprehend Confucianism, The Analects, or Confucius.

Chán Zhōng Shuō Chán's Vernacular Direct Translation

The Master said: "Do not be troubled that people do not understand oneself; be troubled that people are unable to understand oneself."

Confucius said: Do not be troubled that others or oneself do not understand oneself; be troubled that others or oneself are not able to understand oneself.

Note: "不患" and "患" are specialized terms that cannot be replaced by other words, so they are used directly without translation.

(To be continued)

Strictly prohibited to plagiarize, violators will be prosecuted

Replies

缠中说禅 2006/11/15 12:13:36
Hotpot shop reopened, enjoy your meal everyone.

缠中说禅 2006/11/15 12:43:11

[Anonymous] nn

2006-11-15 12:38:31
The explanation in this chapter really makes sense, I support it. I just don't understand how blog host's traffic is so far behind Kong Qingdong's? I feel Kong isn't very decent as a person — knowing the blog host is young and spirited, he still took a jab. Of course the blog host's response was top-notch too. In my view, the blog host is more talented than Kong — how come you can't get recognition from the majority? Have you thought about this or have any insights?

====================

Naturally — he's famous, appears on TV, publishes books. This ID doesn't want to be too famous right now, mainly because the time isn't right yet. Maybe in a year or two.

缠中说禅 2006/11/15 12:44:13

[Anonymous] 射男哥哥

2006-11-15 12:40:23
Dear sister blogger, your brother is here. Reading sister's wonderful writings has become the best enjoyment every day — like the grand tones of celestial bells that only exist in heaven; how many times can they be heard on earth? The gibbering of vulgar creatures like that raving blogger is no more than mad dogs barking at the sun! Take care, sister!

================

Thank you. Everyone understands differently. All opinions are welcome here, as long as you don't fire blanks.

缠中说禅 2006/11/15 12:44:54

[Anonymous] 爱你——数女

2006-11-15 12:41:15
It's getting deeper and deeper, and I like you more and more.

============

Thank you.

缠中说禅 2006/11/15 12:46:38
Everyone, sorry — market's about to open, heading off first. See you.

缠中说禅 2006/11/15 21:10:50

[Anonymous] tryrtytry

2006-11-15 17:22:58
Is the word "seemingly" in "what seems to be the positionless 'not-troubled' in this system" significant?
===========================

Of course it is. Savor it carefully.

缠中说禅 2006/11/15 21:11:50

Smart as a Pig

2006-11-15 15:08:14
I'm amazed that there's actually someone doing scholarship this seriously nowadays. The blog host's own interpretation of The Analects is very convincing. After a few more articles, conviction will turn to admiration, and eventually just complete surrender!
I've never seriously studied any book before. Today I finally understand what real scholarship is.

====================

Let's learn together.