▲ 11 r/taoism

Public domain + open rights Dao De Jing translations: your opinions

I'm looking for rigorous and systematic translations of the Dao De Jing with public domain or open usage rights that I can analyze and republish online. Although most translations with open right are quite old, are you aware of any that fit this criteria?

I've reviewed Legge 1891 and Suzuki/Carus 1913, and although I have an admittedly limited understanding of the Classical Chinese, I wasn't terribly thrilled by either. But they are what I've got at the moment.

One complaint I had were their attempts at making the translations poetic; although I understand the original is also poetic, I felt the poetic translations obscured meaning. I also was not satsified by some inexplicable omissions and additions in the translations.

Overall, regardless of whether or not they fit my (somewhat vague) requirements for rigor, which public domain/open usage rights DDJ translations do you enjoy, and why?

Thanks for your thoughts and opinions!

reddit.com
u/interpolating — 8 days ago
▲ 6 r/Confucianism+1 crossposts

Analects Reader: iPhone live, Android needs help!

Hey folks, realized I didn't announce directly here that Analects Reader is live on iOS. This must be the most relevant of all subs (lmao), so posting a few notes and a couple of very special requests... especially for anyone on Android.

What is it?

Analects Reader of course contains the full text of The Analects itself plus the Legge translation (damn copyright— and btw if you have any ideas for how I could obtain rights for a more... modern translation, please do give me a shout). But it is much more importantly a learning resource. These are just a few of the included tools:

  • Color match mode: Chinese terms and matching English translations are highlighted in matching colors for easy back-and-forth checks of glosses.
  • Per-passage definitions: Literally every Chinese glyph in the entire text is tappable, and all are contextualized to the passage they appear in. Eg. 君子 gets "exemplary person" most places, and "Lord's son" in some others. These are compiled by referencing 8 different translations: Ames & Rosemont, Chin, Lau, Legge, Ni, Roberts, Singerland, and Watson.
  • Pinyin w/ received pronunciations: 說 will not be marked as shūo, it will always be yùe.
  • Three museum-quality historical copies: 1550 Kiyohara house collection manuscript, 1737 National Palace Museum Taiwan Jiang Heng manuscript, and Edo-era National Archive of Japan woodblock
  • Notes, Guides, & Discussion: Take notes fully offline, read commentary a growing list of passages, and link out to discussion for any passage you like.

There's much more too. And a fun aside, since I've got this one "feature stable", I'm about to use the same framework to publish a 道德經 reader.

You can help!

This app is far from done, and I would greatly appreciate your help.

Android users (more urgent): Google requires personal developer accounts to have 14 days of sustained usage by beta users, along with developer-collected feedback, to launch in production. If you would be so kind as to become a beta tester, this would make a huge difference. You can do so by:

  1. Join the tester group (nothing is posted there, it's just the list, and membership is not public): https://groups.google.com/g/analectsreaderbeta
  2. Install from Play: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=net.analects.reader

Once that is done, you can submit feedback on ANY part of the app through the "report a problem with this" link in any definition card (screenshot below).

https://preview.redd.it/73cvysh486th1.png?width=496&format=png&auto=webp&s=6632b0ce1e457e3fc16188ef6ed7c11dd673a7a7

iPhone users: The app is live already (see the link above)! But you can join in the fun of improving the massive amount info that has gone into the definition cards. As mentioned in the other section, there is a "report a problem with this" link in every definition card that you can use if you feel a definition or translation has a problem.

Included a few screenshots to give you some ideas of what this all is.

u/interpolating — 11 days ago

Analects Reader Android is stuck in beta :(

Hey all, I'm back. Desperately need your help.

You may remember, I built the Analects Reader app. It's been on iPhone for a few weeks and doing great.

But Android is stuck. Google makes new developers run a closed test for 14 days first, and mine just got rejected because (they claim!) users didn't leave enough feedback. SO, I've made giving feedback extremely easy.

Every character card (pictured below) now has a problem report link.

https://preview.redd.it/y0nmw28qh4th1.jpg?width=692&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f91bc95145cb0d44842e3a160802c1b120b2c951

You can report a problem with that definition, the translation, or just about anything else that way. Now it takes about ten seconds to let me know if you find something that needs fixing.

If you're on Android, here's how to help:

  1. Join the tester group (nothing is posted there, it's just the list, and membership is not public): https://groups.google.com/g/analectsreaderbeta
  2. Install from Play: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=net.analects.reader

Thanks a bunch!!!

reddit.com
u/interpolating — 12 days ago

Exploring the Analects Ep. 25: A Pleasure to Have in Class (7.25 子以四教:文,行,忠,信)

New episode on 7.25: 子以四教:文,行,忠,信, "The Master taught four things: culture, conduct, commitment, and credibility."

Two of these any school could put on a syllabus. The other two, 忠 and 信, no exam can measure. Confucius could only live them in front of his students and watch for them over the years, and the commentators have argued ever since about why the list runs in this order.

I also get into some of the stories about the lives of disciples Zilu and Min Ziqian from later sources (the woodblock is a Japanese depiction of the stepbrothers story).

Guide, notes and audio: https://www.analects.net/episodes/a-pleasure-to-have-in-class/

u/interpolating — 17 days ago
▲ 4 r/Analects+1 crossposts

Li's Notes on the Analects commentary on 2.12: knowing everything and being able to do everything, you can still be a tool.

Paraphrasing and reordering a late 17th c. note on The Analects. Very relevant to today:

You can take "not a tool" to mean knowing everything and being able to do everything, but that's still being a tool. A "tool" gets its name from its single function. Learn that virtue comes before craft, and conduct comes before results.... This is what being "not a tool" means.

李氏論語劄記:器者,以一能成名之謂。如子路之治賦,冉有之爲宰,公西華之治賓客,以至子貢之瑚璉皆是也。君子之學,德成而上,藝成而下,行成而先,事成而後。顏子視聽言動之間,曾子容貌辭氣顏色之際,而皋夔稷契伊傅周召之功勳德業在焉,此之謂不器。若以無所不知無所不能爲不器,是猶未離乎器者矣。

A more direct (machine) translation:

Li's Notes on the Analects (李氏論語劄記): a vessel means one who makes his name by a single capacity. Zilu (子路) managing the levies, Ran You (冉有) serving as steward, Gongxi Hua (公西華) receiving guests, and even Zigong (子貢) as the hu-lian vessel (瑚璉) are all of this sort. In the gentleman's learning, virtue completed ranks above and craft completed below, conduct completed comes first and business completed after. In Yan Hui's (顏子) looking, listening, speaking and moving, and in Zengzi's (曾子) bearing, tone of speech and countenance, the merits and virtuous achievements of Gao Yao (皋陶), Kui (夔), Ji (稷), Xie (契), Yi Yin (伊尹), Fu Yue (傅說), the Duke of Zhou (周公) and the Duke of Shao (召公) are present. This is what "not a vessel" means. If one takes "not a vessel" to mean knowing everything and being able to do everything, that is still not free of the vessel.

reddit.com
u/interpolating — 24 days ago
▲ 13 r/taoism

Not Daoist, but you might like it: a free Analects reader with the Chinese, the translation, and a tap on every character

This isn't a Daoist text, so feel free to scroll on. But I figured some of you read the Analects too, and I've spent the last year building a reader for it.

It's free, no account, no ads: https://apps.apple.com/app/id6801033467

(Android users see below please)

What it does that a printed translation doesn't: the Chinese and the English sit together, and you can tap any character and get the reading for that passage — not a dictionary's first sense. Color match paints each phrase of the Chinese and the phrase of the English that answers to it, so you can see where the translation added words and where it quietly dropped one. There's a 1550 manuscript and an Edo block print you can read the same way, character by character. And a podcast that goes one passage at a time, if you'd rather listen.

Also worth mentioning: the reader is set up as a platform, and the Analects is the book it contains now. The Daodejing is short enough that it could be next in one go. The Zhuangzi is not — it would be a chapter at a time, maybe inner chapters first? If either would be useful to you, say so, and say which translations would be best to put side-by-side (also considering copyrights... shout out to Legge for this version of The Analects)

If you're on Android: the app is done, but Google makes new developers run a closed test before it can go on the store. Joining is two steps: join this Google group (it's just the list of who's allowed to install; nothing is posted there) —

https://groups.google.com/g/analectsreaderbeta

and then install on mobile with Google Play:

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=net.analects.reader

or via web:

https://play.google.com/apps/testing/net.analects.reader

Thanks for checking it out, and please let me know what you think!!! I really appreciate any and all feedback, and want to make this an excellent platform for learning and study of ancient Chinese philosophy and language.

u/interpolating — 1 month ago
▲ 96 r/classicalchinese+1 crossposts

One passage, five taps — the Analects reader I promised last month is on the app store!

A month ago I posted screenshots of an Analects reader and said I probably wouldn't renew my Apple developer license unless people actually wanted it. People here seemed to want it, so I did, renew it, and now I've published the app!

https://apps.apple.com/app/id6801033467

Rather than list what it does, here is one passage — 1.1 — and what happens when you tap it.

說 in 1.1 on the 1550 Kiyohara manuscript: yuè, \"pleased\" — not shuō, \"speak\".

1. 學而時習之,不亦說乎. Third character from the end: 說. Every dictionary's first sense is shuō, "to speak", and that reading wrecks the line. Tap it and the card gives the reading for this passage — yuè, "pleased, delighted", loangraph for 悅, and it says in so many words: not "to speak, say" here. The page you're tapping is the 1550 清原枝賢 manuscript in the 清家文庫 at Kyoto, kunten and vermilion punctuation and all. Every character on the photograph is mapped, so the same gloss opens on a 475-year-old hand as on typeset text.

Color match: 不亦⋯乎 takes one color each of three times, and Legge's \"Is it not\" takes it too.

2. The same passage in the study view with the "color match" feature turned on. 不亦⋯乎 is one construction wrapped around a different predicate three times, and each time it takes its own color — and Legge's corresponding "Is it not" takes that color with it. What stays grey in the English is what Legge added but doesn't map closely to the Chinese: 時習 is two characters, and his "with a constant perseverance and application" colors only "constant" and "application". The rest is Legge.

Tap 說, and \"pleasant\" lights up in the English.

3. Even without color mapping on, just tap a character in the study view and its English lights up: 說 ↔ "pleasant".

為政 as one word, then its two characters, then how the book uses it: six of six usages are the same.

4. It also can tell you what characters constitute a "word". Tap 為政 in 2.1 and the card treats it as the unit it is — "to govern, conduct the government" — then gives 為 and 政 separately, then the general sense, the part of speech, and how many of the book's uses of 為政 have this sense: six of six. None of that is a dictionary entry. Every character in all 512 passages has a gloss written for the passage it sits in, and every multi-character term is glossed as one.

Housekeeping: it's free — no accounts, no ads, no analytics, nothing locked. Notes are Markdown files in a folder you choose, so they outlive the app. Traditional or simplified, vertical or horizontal.

Android users — a favor. The signed build is ready; Google now makes a new personal developer account run a closed test with at least twelve people opted in continuously for fourteen days before it will even take an application for production. If you're on Android and would use this, join the tester group and you'll get it as an ordinary Play install; drop out the moment it's properly on the store. I need a dozen, and I'd rather they were people who'd read the thing.

https://play.google.com/apps/testing/net.analects.reader

(if that doesn't work, please join this Google group: https://groups.google.com/g/analectsreaderbeta )

Thanks for checking this out. Please please please, let me know what you think!!!

u/interpolating — 1 month ago
▲ 25 r/Bart

Tap before the gate closes. It works!

You can tap before the gate closed and it will just stay open for you. It seems like people don’t realize this because everyone lets the gate close before tapping.

The gates are slow so the line to exit the station gets long when trains are full. It’s a little easier for everyone if they just stay open.

reddit.com
u/interpolating — 1 month ago

Sitting Shiva with Confucius | Exploring the Analects Ep. 24 (Passages 7.9 & 7.10)

This episode covers two passages on how Confucius carried himself in the presence of the bereaved. These look at first like strangely specific behavioral quirks, but buried in them is a lesson in empathy and situational awareness.

youtu.be
u/interpolating — 1 month ago
▲ 63 r/Analects+2 crossposts

If you know 好 hǎo vs hào, you already know how 惡 works

Most learners meet this early with 好: hǎo is the state (good), hào is the attitude toward that state (to like, to be fond of). It's why 愛好 àihào, 好奇 hàoqí and 好客 hàokè all take the fourth tone — none of them mean "good", they mean regarding something as good.

惡 does exactly the same thing. I don't think it gets pointed out often enough:

  • è — the state: bad, evil. 惡人 èrén, 惡意 èyì, 罪惡 zuì'è
  • wù — the attitude: to hate, to find bad. 厭惡 yànwù, 可惡 kěwù, 憎惡 zēngwù

It's the same relationship and works in the same direction. Once you see 好 and 惡 as a matched pair (state vs. attitude-toward-state) a lot of compounds stop needing to be memorised individually. When you hit either character in a new word, the question is just: is this describing the thing, or someone's stance on the thing?

There's even 好惡, read hàowù — "likes and dislikes, preferences." One word, both derived readings, sitting next to each other. It's a neat illustration of the whole pattern, and the pairing is ancient: you can even find these two sitting close to one another in The Analects (passage 4.3) deliberately paired together 2500 years ago:

>唯仁者,能好人,能惡人 wéi rén zhě, néng hào rén, néng wù rén

"Only the humane are capable of hào-ing people and wù-ing people", of properly liking and properly disliking them. Both characters in their fourth-tone verb reading, clearly paired opposites in a single line.

Two things to watch out for:

惡 has a third modern reading, ě, and it's the one you'll actually hit in conversation: 惡心 ěxīn, nauseating/disgusting. Not è, not wù. Worth learning separately because it doesn't fit the pattern above at all.

And a fourth in Classical Chinese, wū, an interrogative "how? wherein?", as in 惡乎 wūhū (no Homer). So the same graph in a classical text can be three different words (plus one more in modern Chinese), and the tone is the only thing distinguishing three of them. Classical texts don't mark tone, which is why some passages are still argued over: Analects 4.4 has 無惡也, and whether that's "no hatred" (wù) or "no wrongdoing" (è) has been disputed for two thousand years, with the passage meaning noticeably different things either way.

Anyway, if 好 hǎo/hào has already clicked for you, 惡 is the same shape, and 好惡 is worth adding as a vocabulary item purely because it demonstrates the pattern.

Any other 多音字 pairs where the tone shift is doing this same state-vs-attitude job? 樂 lè/yuè and 說 shuō/shuì are the ones I know, but they're not as cleanly parallel.

I got into this working on a podcast episode about those two Analects passages. Write-up is at analects.net/episodes/love-and-hate/ if a deep-dive on the Classical Chinese behind it is of interest to you.

u/interpolating — 2 months ago

Exploring The Analects: The Side Quest Trap — 2.16 (7/26/2026)

(Also available on Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-side-quest-trap-2-16/id1863183266?i=1000778382829 )

Side quests can be the best part of a game, but every hour spent on one is an hour not spent on the thing you set out to do. Confucius watched his own students wander off into farming, medicine, astronomy, and board games, and gave them eight characters about it.

In this episode, we read passage 2.16 — 攻乎異端,斯害也已, "Laboring along the byways—this is harmful indeed" — exploring its meaning as a warning about detours. The byways are what commentators call the 小道 (small ways) and 他技 (other skills): everything that isn't the long road to becoming a so-called "exemplary person". None of them are wrong. The world needs farmers and doctors. They're just incompatible with the goal, in the eyes of Confucius, and you only get one life to spend.

But that's not how the passage has been read for most of its life. Around 500 CE 攻 flipped from "labor" to "attack," 異端 hardened into "perverse doctrines," and by the Ming a humble tone marker was reread as "stop". This transformed a caution about distraction into official license to stamp out Buddhism, Daoism, and anything off-message. Two passages earlier, the Analects says the exemplary person is inclusive, not partisan.

Along the way: why Confucius probably wouldn't have wanted his students to become professional musicians (in the Zhou, court musicianship was reserved for the blind), the ladder from 君子 (exemplary person) to 賢人 (the worthy) to 聖人 (the sage), measured by how many lives you touch. Plus, a copy of the Analects sealed in a cave until 1973 that quietly undercuts the whole "attack" reading.

Episode guide, with the full Chinese text and language notes: https://analects.net/episodes/side-quest-trap/

youtube.com
u/interpolating — 2 months ago
▲ 2 r/classicalchinese+1 crossposts

The Analects for learners — 15,920 definitions, correct pinyin for Classical Chinese, and a woodblock print mode just for fun

I built this to assist my own study of Classical Chinese through The Analects, but I think this sub can benefit from it a lot as well.

The site contains 15,920 definitions, so each character's gloss is written specifically for the passage it appears in, and weighing 8 different English translations of the text. For example: the definition of 君 will show as "lord" in some passages, "to act like a lord" in other passages, and still others as half of the compound 君子.

I've also included 11,640 glossing units. These are multi-character terms like 君子 or 子曰, as well as sentence patterns like the "不亦...乎" that appears three times in Analects 1.1. If you hover over 君子 you will get not only the specific definition for that passage, but an explain that it can mean either "exemplary person/gentleman" or literally "a noble's son" depending on context.

Another feature: the pinyin is right for the classical readings. No generic converter, which is how some other tools end up with 說 as shuō and the 弟 of 孝弟 with dì. I set these per passage by auditing against a printed pinyin learner's edition of the entire book. And the annotations can be toggled off, so you can read bare and check yourself.

With 彩 Match, every passage has an Off / Match / Tones switch. 彩 Match colors the English and the Chinese it translates in pairs — tap a word on either side and it boxes its partner. Great for seeing how a terse five-character line unfolds into a sentence. Tone coloring applies per-passage tone background or character colors. Characters can display in traditional, simplified, whatever you want.

This is the standard "study" view:

analects.net/analects/1-xue-er?view=study

Some parts I built more for fun than anything else:

The classical editions. One tap sets the whole text as a Ming woodblock leaf — columns right to left, framed and foxed paper, vermillion reading marks, a fishtail on the fold, pages that turn — or as a manuscript in a brush hand where no two 之 on the page are drawn alike. Glosses still work; the big ○ before each passage taps open to its translation. Direct links, if you just want to look:

analects.net/analects/1-xue-er?view=block (woodblock)

analects.net/analects/1-xue-er?view=brush (manuscript)

Caveats, honestly: my own commentary covers 33 passages so far (there's a podcast behind it); the rest just carry Legge's 1861 translation — scrutable, dated, but no copyright. Start with Book 1 or Book 4 if you're trying 文言文 for the first time.

And if a reading looks wrong to you, please say so. I'd much rather be corrected than have someone learn a wrong reading from me!

u/interpolating — 2 months ago

Would you enjoy reading The Analects like this?

Been experimenting a bit with a standalone app for The Analects focused on an enjoyable reading experience and functionality for assistance in learning CC. Here are some screenshot of different modes, songti print style, dark print, classic reader, study mode.

If this seems of interest to you, I’d love to hear it. My Apple developer license is expiring and I’m not likely to renew it unless it seems like folks would download and use this. Built on react native so could also release on Android and web but haven’t tried.

u/interpolating — 3 months ago
▲ 697 r/Analects+1 crossposts

Bronze ritual food vessel with cloud texture. China, Warring States periods, State of Chu, 5th-4th century BC [1222x1222]

u/MunakataSennin — 3 months ago
▲ 45 r/EasternPhilosophy+1 crossposts

These words of Confucius were leveraged against Buddhists and Daoists for centuries. They probably just meant "don't get distracted."

For most of the last thousand years, Confucian officials had a line from The Analects that they used to justify suspicion of Buddhism and Daoism. It's eight characters long, and three of them probably don't mean what the tradition decided they meant.

>2.16 子曰:「攻乎異端,斯害也已。」

The standard reading has been roughly "To study heterodox doctrines — this is harmful", or, in its strongest form, "Attack heterodox doctrines, and their harm will cease." That second version is a license, and it was used as one.

Three of the eight characters are genuinely of indeterminate meaning, and almost everything turns on them.

攻 (gōng) is usually "attack." But it appears in only two other passages in the Analects and is about literal attacks in neither. At 11.17 Confucius tells his students to sound the drums and 攻 Ran Qiu for enriching the Ji family — public denunciation, not battle. At 12.21 he says to 攻 your own faults rather than other people's. Both are a kind of moral censure. It is also a plausible loan graph for 功 (gōng), to work at.

異端 (yì duān) is literally "different endpoints." 異 is other or divergent; 端 is a terminus or extreme — but not necessarily a final one. Modern 開端 (kāiduān) means a beginning. "Heterodoxy" is a later hardening of the phrase, not something the two characters demand.

已 (yǐ) is normally a sentence-final particle of emphasis. It can also be read as the verb to stop.

Multiply those out. Take 攻 as labour and 異端 as alternative endpoints, and you get a warning about wasted effort: working toward the wrong destination costs you a life you only get once. Take 攻 as attack and 異端 as heterodoxy, and you get polemic. Add 已 as "stop," and the sentence stops describing anything at all and becomes a strongly worded instruction.

The hardening has a timeline

What I find striking is how late the doctrinal reading actually consolidates.

皇侃 (Huáng Kǎn, 488–545), the major Six Dynasties commentator on the Analects, still glosses 攻 as 治 (zhì) — to work at, to apply oneself to. Not attack. What is circulating around 500 is the hardened sense of 異端 as "heterodoxy" among literary writers— so it's a fact about the word before it becomes a fact about this passage.

By the twelfth century 朱熹 (Zhū Xī) had made the heterodoxy reading standard. Even he, tellingly, kept 攻 as "devote effort to", and identified the offending doctrines as Mohism and Yangzhuism. That is almost certainly anachronistic: only the seeds of those schools existed in Confucius's lifetime, and it would be odd for him to denounce them exactly once in the entire text and never again.

As Buddhism and Daoism grew in China, the heterodoxy reading became politically useful. The Ming completed the job by taking 已 as "stop," which turned the line into an imperative. At that point it licensed officials to suppress not only Buddhism and Daoism but any unapproved reading of the classics themselves.

The tomb manuscript

There is physical evidence against the attack reading.

In 1973 excavators opened Han tomb no. 40 at Bajiaolang, in Dingzhou — the burial of 劉脩 (Liú Xiū), King Huai of Zhongshan, who died in 55 BCE. Among the bamboo slips was a copy of the Analects, now known as the 定州論語 (Dingzhou Analects).

At 2.16 it does not read 攻. It reads 功 — to work, to achieve.

That doesn't settle what the "different endpoints" were. But it's a first-century-BCE reader who evidently wasn't being told to attack anything.

The irony sits two passages earlier

2.14:

>子曰:「君子周而不比,小人比而不周。」

>"The exemplary person is inclusive and not partisan; the petty person is partisan and not inclusive."

Two lines later, the text was made into an instrument of exactly that partisanship.

And the vocabulary that supports the mild reading is in the Analects itself. 19.4, 子夏 (Zǐxià):

>雖小道,必有可觀者焉;致遠恐泥,是以君子不為也

>"Even in the small ways there is surely something worth seeing; but pursued far they bog you down, and so the exemplary person does not take them up."

That's 2.16's argument stated plainly by a disciple, with the concession built in: the byways are worth something. The objection is to distance, not to value.

What I'd actually like to discuss

I should be upfront that the distraction reading is a minority one. The orthodox reading for most of the last thousand years was the other, and it was written into imperial policy. I'm not claiming the tradition simply got it wrong for a millennium; I'm claiming the text underdetermines it and the resolution went the way power needed it to go.

What I'm curious about, for this sub specifically: does the same drift show up in the other traditions?

Chinese Buddhism has the 外道 (wàidào) "outside paths" for non-Buddhist teachings, which is structurally almost identical to 異端, "different endpoints." Both start as spatial metaphors about routes rather than verdicts about error. And if I understand correctly, 邪見 / micchā-diṭṭhi, "wrong view," is a category with real teeth in the Pali material.

So: is there a general tendency for "wrong path" language to harden into "heresy" language once a tradition acquires state backing? And did 外道 or 邪見 undergo anything like the same shift? Or did Buddhist institutional history push those terms in a different direction? I know the Confucian side of this much better than the Buddhist side and would genuinely like to be corrected.

My translation of Passage 2.16 along with related analysis is available at https://www.analects.net/episodes/22 if you want to check my work.

It's part of a series that goes through the Analects passage by passage — this one is episode 22 — but the argument above stands on its own and I'd rather talk about the passage than the show.

reddit.com
u/interpolating — 3 months ago

Why did Mencius comment to Shen Tong on attacking Yan?

Reading the Mengzi 2B8 last night, I wondered why Mencius dared to answer Shen Tong when he asked about attacking Yan. As I read it:

  1. Shen Tong of Qi personally asks Mencius if it would be permissible to attack Yan, to which he replies it may be permissible since Yan's leadership was usurped.
  2. Qi then captures Yan and a disastrous occupation ensues, leading people to wonder why Mencius advised Qi to attack Yan.
  3. Mencius replies that he was not asked who could attack, only if an attack would be permissible; Qi's occupation failed because its leadership is unjust just like Yan's.

I am reminded of two admonitions from The Analects that may have prevented him from answering Shen Tong:

  1. Passage 15.1: "Duke Ling of Wei asked Confucius about [military] formations (zhen 陈). Confucius replied, “I have heard things about sacrificial vessels, but I have not studied military matters.” The next day, he took his departure." (Peimin Ni)
  2. Passage 11.22, when asked why he answered the same question differently for two different people: "Ran Qiu is overly cautious, and so I wished to urge him on. Zilu, on the other hand, is too impetuous, and so I sought to hold him back." (Slingerland)

Passage 15.1 shows Confucius's unwillingness to comment on military matters in an unjust state. Given, he is advising a Duke– not a minister, and likely not in a personal capacity– so there is understandably more at stake in giving an answer leading to a bad decision.

Passage 11.22 shows that in answering questions, Confucius would clearly weigh the strengths and weaknesses of the individual inquiring. We can't say Mencius strictly did not weigh Shen Tong's strengths and weaknesses– we don't know how he accounted for them in his answer– but if he suspected the answer would be used to justify an attack on Yan, it seems a glaring omission to fail to mention only a just leader should invade.

This portion of the Mengzi then explains the proper way to respond to mistakes; we should acknowledge them and grow from them rather than becoming recalcitrant.

But with passages 15.1 and 11.22 of The Analects in mind, and assuming Mencius was aware of these or similar stories about Confucius:

  1. What led him to dare to answer this question?
  2. What led him to answer it without also advising that Qi should clearly consider its own ability to govern justly?
reddit.com
u/interpolating — 3 months ago
▲ 14 r/Analects+1 crossposts

Analects 2.16 攻乎異端斯害也已 what does it mean to you?

I’ve been reading commentaries, English translations, and related secondary literature recently trying to come to a firm opinion. Would love to hear how you interpret the passage, along with what it means to you personally.

Places I’ve landed personally (though I understand these are far from the only answers):

攻 is either a homophone for 功 or close enough in meaning to be read as such

端 is easiest to understand in the context of 道 metaphors, so if the “end” of the normal 道 is being a 君子, 賢人 or 聖人, heading far down 小道 toward 異端 is to go off on a tangent, assuming your goal is to become an exemplary person. This reading aligns it well with 19.4 about 小道.

也已 is probably grammatical and adding tone or emphasis to the statement, rather than meaning to stop.

I still don’t really know how to square the idea that it’s harmful to spend time on “lesser” ways with the modern world. I suppose even if you suspect your occupation is a 小道, you can still aim to be an exemplary person by “engaging in government” in the 2.22 sense of acting 弟 and 孝 and toward friends 信.

reddit.com
u/interpolating — 3 months ago
▲ 5 r/China

Most "Confucius says" quotes are fake. The real Analects is better, so I've been making videos going through it one passage at a time.

Most of what circulates in English as "Confucius says" is just horrible jokes or fortune cookie tripe. Almost none of it is the real thing. The Analects is so much better: the real record of a teacher and his students arguing, joking, running from danger, and sharing grief... plus 2,000 years of commentators who think they know what every line means.

A few entertaining things from the real text you might not know:

He loses his cool over a wine vessel. 觚不觚,觚哉!觚哉! — "A gu that isn't a gu! What a gu! What a gu!" This guy is staring at a cup he thinks is being called the wrong thing and spawning an entire philosophy about the power of names.

He tells his most loyal disciple — the loud one, the ex-fighter who never learned to sit still — that a man like him won't die a natural death. Years later, Zilu is caught in a succession coup in Wey. He could have gotten out. He goes in instead, and when his cap-strings are cut in the fighting, he stops to retie them: "A gentleman may die, but his cap does not come off." When the news reached Confucius, he had the pickled meat carried out of his kitchen and never ate it again. Yum, pickled meat.

And he kept a list of things he refused to discuss: freak occurrences, feats of strength, rebellion, spirits... the clickbait of his time! His response to the spectacle of his own era was to starve it.

I've been making Exploring the Analects, a video series that goes through the text one passage at a time. Every episode takes a passage from its original Chinese, the traditional characters are on screen with pinyin as they're spoken, so you're never taking a translation's word for it, and then gets into what's actually going on: the history of the states and the people involved, where the major translators diverge in their renderings, and what the commentators have been arguing about since the Han dynasty.

You don't need any Chinese to follow it. If you're learning, it's a bonus. The passages are short and self-contained, which makes the Analects one of the friendlier doors into Classical Chinese, and the episodes dig into why the grammar works the way it does.

It's also on Spotify and Apple if you'd rather listen, and I put up full episode guides with the Chinese text at analects.net. If you want a place to start, the wine-vessel episode is a good one.

Happy to answer anything about the text or the fights people have had over it.

u/interpolating — 4 months ago