{"id":8904,"date":"2019-11-13T17:27:46","date_gmt":"2019-11-13T17:27:46","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/chinesemoment.com\/chinese-reading\/the-book-mengzi\/"},"modified":"2019-11-13T17:27:46","modified_gmt":"2019-11-13T17:27:46","slug":"the-book-mengzi","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/chinesemoment.com\/my\/the-book-mengzi\/","title":{"rendered":"The book Mengzi"},"content":{"rendered":"
 The Mengzi \u5b5f\u5b50 "Master Meng" is a collection of stories of the Co<\/em>nfucian philosopher Meng Ke \u5b5f\u8f72 (385-304 or 372-289 BCE, latinized as "Mencius") and his discussions with rulers, disciples and adversaries. It is part of the Co<\/em>nfucian canon as one of the Sishu \u56db\u4e66 "Four Books".<\/p>\n

Although the history Shiji \u53f2\u8bb0 states that the author of the Mengzi was Meng Ke himself (together with some of his disciples like Wan Zhang \u4e07\u7ae0), it must be assumed that at least part of the book was compiled by his disciples after Meng Ke’s death. It is seven chapters long, which are each divided in two parts. The titles of most chapters are the names of Meng Ke’s co<\/em>nversational partners, like King Hui of Liang, Duke Wen of Teng \u6ed5\u6587\u516c, Gunsun Chou \u516c\u5b59\u4e11, Wan Zhang, or Gaozi \u544a\u5b50; the chapter Li Lou \u79bb\u5a04 is, in a method also known from the Co<\/em>nfucian Analects Lunyu \u8bba\u8bed, named after the first words (in this case, the name of a semi-historical person); the same is valid for the last chapter, Jinxin \u5c3d\u5fc3 "Exhausting all his heart". The arrangement of the chapters is explained by Zhao Qi \u8d75\u5c90 from the Later Han period \u540e\u6c49 (25-220 CE) in the following way: Mengzi was of the opinion that the sage rulers of the past, Yao \u5c27 and Shun \u821c, ruled with the methods of humankindness (ren \u4ec1) and proper behaviour (yi \u4e49). These were the most im<\/em>portant guidelines for government and had to be explained to a ruler first, in this instance King Hui of Wei (Liang Huiwang \u6881\u60e0\u738b). The practical adaption of these principles is explained next (chapter Go<\/em>ngsun Chou \u516c\u5b59\u4e11), followed by the argument that a revival of the virtues used in antiquity is most im<\/em>portant (Teng Wengong \u6ed5\u6587\u516c). In the chapter Li Lou \u79bb\u5a04 the use of the rites (li \u793c) is explained that go out of the heart. Of all proper behaviour the most im<\/em>portant is filial piety (xiao \u5b5d) that is accordingly described in the next chapter (Wan Zhang \u4e07\u7ae0). Filial piety arises from affects and character (qing xing \u60c5\u6027), which are explained in the following chapter (Gaozi\u544a\u5b50). Man can o<\/em>nly co<\/em>ntrol his affects by exhausting all his heart (Jin xin \u5c3d\u5fc3) to come into one line with Heaven’s will. The imperial bibliography Yiwenzhi \u827a\u6587\u5fd7 of the official dynastic history Hanshu \u6c49\u4e66 speaks of eleven chapters, which means that 4 chapters were later added. Indeed, Zhao Qi mentions the titles of four "outer" chapters (waishu \u5916\u4e66: Xingshan bian \u6027\u5584\u8fa9 "Discussing the human nature", Wenshuo \u6587\u8bf4 "Explanation from the literature", Xiaojing \u5b5d\u7ecf "Classic of filial piety" [not the received Xiaojing!], and Weizheng \u4e3a\u653f "Active government") which are not included in the received version, probably because of their lower quality compared with the seven "inner chapters" (neipian \u5185\u7bc7). Surviving parts of the Outer Book seem to be forgeries by the Ming period scholar Yao Shilin \u59da\u58eb\u7ca6. Zhao Qi, Zhu Xi \u6731\u71b9 and Jiao Xun \u7126\u5faa were of the opinion that Meng Ke had compiled the book. This assertion is doubted by Han Yu \u97e9\u6108, Su Zhe \u82cf\u8f99 and Chao Go<\/em>ngwu \u6641\u516c\u6b66 who were sure that the book is a compilation of Mengzi’s disciples. Today a middle way between the two competing groups is preferred that also follows the early argument of the historian Sima Qian \u53f8\u9a6c\u8fc1 who said that the core part of the book was written by Meng Ke, while his disciples added some other parts.<\/p>\n

For a long time, the book Mengzi was seen as one of the many schools of thought (zhuzi \u8bf8\u5b50) and was o<\/em>nly classified as a Co<\/em>nfucian treatise between the Han and the Tang \u5510 (618-907) periods. The Tang period scholar Han Yu, who has written the treatise Yuandao \u539f\u9053, was the first to said that Mengzi was the real successor of Confucius. It became a Co<\/em>nfucian classic o<\/em>nly during the Northern Song period \u5317\u5b8b (960-1126), when it was integrated into the canon of the Jiujing \u4e5d\u7ecf "Nine Classics". The position of the book was co<\/em>nsecrated by the Southern Song period \u5357\u5b8b (1127-1279) Neo-Co<\/em>nfucianphilosopher Zhu Xi, who made it part of the cano<\/em>nical "Four Books". From then on the book Mengzi was part of the canon to be studied to pass the state examinations.<\/p>\n

The most im<\/em>portant surviving ancient prints of the Mengzi are the small-sized edition version of eight Classics (bajing \u516b\u7ecf) from the Song period that was reprinted several times as a facsimile by the imperial household during the Kangxi reign \u5eb7\u7199 (1662-1722), a large-character print from the Song period including Zhao Qi’s commentary (reprinted in the collectanea Sibu co<\/em>ngkan \u56db\u90e8\u4e1b\u520a and Sibu beiyao \u56db\u90e8\u5907\u8981, a print of the Nine Classics from 1640 by the Qiugu Studio \u6c42\u53e4\u658b, the edition of the Thirteen Classics with commentaries (Shisanjing zhushu fu kaozheng \u5341\u4e09\u7ecf\u6ce8\u758f\u9644\u8003\u8bc1) printed by the imperial printing shop of the Hall of Military Glory (Wuyingdian \u6b66\u82f1\u6bbf) during the Qianlong reign \u4e7e\u9686 (1736-1795), and the version in theJiaoshi co<\/em>ngshu \u7126\u6c0f\u4e1b\u4e66, published during early 19th century by the Diaogu Studio \u96d5\u83f0\u697c.<\/p>\n

The oldest commentators were Zhao Qi (Mengzi zhu \u5b5f\u5b50\u6ce8) and Liu Xi \u5218\u7199 from the Later Han period. Liu Xi’s commentary, as well as that of the Liang period \u6881 (502-557) scholar Qimu Sui \u7da6\u6bcd\u9083, are lost. o<\/em>nly during the Northern Song period theMengzi attracted the deeper interest of Co<\/em>nfucian scholars. There is a commentary traditio<\/em>nally attributed to Sun Shi \u5b59\u596d, the Mengzi shu \u5b5f\u5b50\u758f, which is included in the collection Shisanjing zhushu \u5341\u4e09\u7ecf\u6ce8\u758f. The most im<\/em>portant commentator of the age of Neo-Co<\/em>nfucianism was the Southern Song period scholar Zhu Xi, who has written the commentary Mengzi zhangju jizhu \u5b5f\u5b50\u7ae0\u53e5\u96c6\u6ce8, short Mengzi jizhu \u5b5f\u5b50\u96c6\u6ce8. The standard Qing commentary is Jiao Xun’s Mengzi zhengyi \u5b5f\u5b50\u6b63\u4e49.
 
<\/div>\n