A Deep Exploration of the Way of Sovereign and Minister in 'The Analects: Xian Wen' and the Contingency of Benevolence and Righteousness

Chapter 4: The Ren of Guan Zhong – Bearing Responsibility for the World Beyond Personal Loyalty (Part I)

Section 1: Zilu’s Question: The Dilemma of Loyalty and Righteousness

Master Zilu said: "Duke Huan killed Gongzi Jiu; Zhaohu died for him, but Guan Zhong did not die." He asked: "Was he not benevolent (Ren)$38" The Master said: "Duke Huan united the feudal lords nine times without relying on chariots of war; this was the work of Guan Zhong. It was like Ren! It was like Ren!" (桓公杀公子纠，召忽死之，管仲不死。"曰："未仁乎？"子曰："桓公九合诸侯，不以兵车，管仲之力也。如其仁！如其仁！")

Master Zilu’s question is direct, matching his character.

Gongzi Jiu and Gongzi Xiaobai (later Duke Huan) were sons of Duke Xiang of Qi. During the chaos in Qi, they fled to different states. Gongzi Jiu fled to Lu, accompanied by Master Guan Zhong and Zhaohu; Gongzi Xiaobai fled to Ju, accompanied by Bao Shuya. Later, the people of Qi welcomed Xiaobai as ruler, and Gongzi Jiu was executed. In this process, Zhaohu died for Gongzi Jiu, but Guan Zhong did not die; instead, he accepted the appointment of Duke Huan as his Prime Minister.

Zilu’s confusion is entirely understandable: According to the ethical standards of the time, when one’s lord is killed, a minister ought to commit suicide to demonstrate unwavering loyalty. Zhaohu achieved this; Guan Zhong did not. Not only did he fail to die, but he went on to serve the very man who killed his former master—was this not a lack of Ren$39

This question touches upon one of the core ethical dilemmas in Pre-Qin thought: When personal loyalty conflicts with great righteousness (Da Yi) for the world, which should take precedence$40

Section 2: The Death of Zhaohu – The Model of "Minor Faithfulness" (Liang)

Before discussing Master Guan Zhong’s "not dying," we must first understand Master Zhaohu’s "death."

Guanzi, Da Kuang records the circumstances of Zhaohu’s suicide in detail. Before Gongzi Jiu was killed, Zhaohu had already declared his position to Guan Zhong: "You served Jiu as an advisor; I served Jiu as a protector. An advisor may survive, but a protector cannot."

This statement is extremely important. Zhaohu distinguished between two types of ministerial service: "advising" (Fu) and "protecting" (Bao). The "advisor" was a strategist whose duty was to offer plans to help the lord achieve greatness; the "protector" was a close attendant whose duty was to pledge his life, to live and die with the lord.

In Zhaohu’s view, Guan Zhong was "advising" Jiu, so he could survive—because his value lay in his talent, and if he died, that talent would be lost. But Zhaohu was "protecting" Jiu, so he had to die—because his value lay in his loyalty, and if the lord died and he did not, his loyalty would cease to exist.

This distinction reflects a meticulous ethical consideration. However, the Master later, in answering Zigong, categorized Zhaohu’s action as "the faithfulness of an ordinary man or woman" (Pi fu pi fu zhi wei liang)—was this a rejection of Zhaohu’s deed$41

We will discuss this shortly. For now, note that Zhaohu’s suicide was widely accepted and praised in contemporary society. Shijing, Qin Feng, Huang Niao (though about the殉葬, human sacrifices, for Duke Mu of Qin, it reflects the culture of suicide for loyalty) laments: "That azure Heaven, has destroyed my fine men! If they could be redeemed, I would give a hundred of my own lives!" (彼苍者天，歼我良人！如可赎兮，人百其身。) People regretted the sacrifice but did not negate the act of dying itself.

In the ancient view of life and death, suicide for loyalty was considered a supreme act. It stemmed from a deep conviction—the meaning of life lies not in its length, but in the object to whom one is loyal. Once the object of loyalty is gone, one’s continued existence loses its meaning.

Liji, Tan Gong I records Zengzi’s words: "When a bird is about to die, its cry is mournful; when a man is about to die, his words are good" (鸟之将死，其鸣也哀；人之将死，其言也善). Death imparts ultimate truth to all words and deeds—in the face of death, no one speaks falsehoods. Zhaohu’s suicide was the ultimate testament to his loyalty to Gongzi Jiu.

Section 3: Guan Zhong’s "Not Dying" – A Shocking Choice

Master Guan Zhong chose not to die. Not only did he not die, but he accepted the appointment of Duke Huan—the man who killed his former lord—as his Prime Minister.

In the social context of the time, this was almost unbelievable. It was equivalent to a general surrendering to the enemy after his commander was killed, and then becoming the enemy’s chief strategist—an act considered a profound disgrace in any era.

So, why did Guan Zhong do this$42

Guanzi, Da Kuang contains Guan Zhong’s own explanation: "I heard: 'A minister who does not exert his full effort for his lord is disloyal; one who cannot die after his lord’s demise is unrighteous. If so, my service to Jiu was not disloyal; surviving and then serving Duke Huan is not unrighteous. My refusal to die for Jiu while benefiting the people of the world—this is my loyalty.'" (吾不死纠而利天下之民，是吾之忠也。)

This passage is crucial. Guan Zhong established a revolutionary ethical judgment: the object of "Loyalty" (Zhong) should not be limited to one person (the lord), but must extend to all the people under Heaven.

This judgment aligns perfectly with the Master’s appraisal. The Master said: "Duke Huan united the feudal lords nine times without relying on chariots of war; this was the work of Guan Zhong. It was like Ren! It was like Ren!"—Guan Zhong’s Ren lay not in whether he died for Gongzi Jiu, but in the fact that by assisting Duke Huan, he brought peace to the world.

Section 4: "Nine Summits of the Lords, Without Relying on Chariots of War" – The Historical Content of Guan Zhong’s Ren

The eight characters, "Nine summits of the lords, without relying on chariots of war" (Jiu He Zhuhou, bu yi bing che), require careful interpretation.

"Nine Summits of the Lords" (Jiu He Zhuhou)—Under Guan Zhong's guidance, Duke Huan convened the feudal lords nine times (the number "nine" often denoting plurality). These assemblies included:

• The Summit of Bei Xing (Zuo Zhuan, 13th Year of Duke Zhuang)
• The Summit of Ke (Zuo Zhuan, 13th Year of Duke Zhuang, recorded the coercion of Duke Huan by Cao Mo)
• The Alliance of You (Zuo Zhuan, 16th Year of Duke Zhuang)
• The Summit of Juan
• The Summit of Tao
• The Alliance of Kuaiqiu (Zuo Zhuan, 9th Year of Duke Xi)
• And others.

The primary content of these assemblies was mediating disputes among the lords and maintaining world order.

"Without relying on chariots of war"—This is the key phrase. In the Spring and Autumn period, there were two ways to convene the lords: one was "with chariots of war," meaning forcing participation through military conquest; the other was "without chariots of war," meaning earning willing participation through moral appeal. Most of Duke Huan’s assemblies were "without chariots of war"—meaning the lords participated voluntarily, drawn by the moral prestige of Qi and Guan Zhong’s diplomatic wisdom.

Why is this point so significant$43

Because in Pre-Qin political ethics, "subduing an enemy without fighting" (Bu Zhan Er Qu Ren Zhi Bing) was the highest ideal, and "winning hearts by virtue" (Yi De Fu Ren) was the supreme political aspiration.

Mencius, Gongsun Chou I, states: "To use force under the guise of benevolence is hegemony; hegemony always requires a great state. To practice benevolence through virtue is kingship; kingship does not wait for size. Tang achieved it with seventy li; King Wen with one hundred li. Those who subdue men by force are not inwardly convinced, only outwardly constrained by power. Those who subdue men by virtue are genuinely pleased and sincerely submit" (以力假仁者霸，霸必有大国；以德行仁者王，王不待大……以德服人者，中心悦而诚服也).

Although Duke Huan was merely a "Hegemon" (using force under the guise of benevolence), his practice of "without chariots of war" brought him close to the realm of "winning hearts by virtue." This is precisely why the Master called him "Zheng" and Guan Zhong "Ren."

Section 5: The Weight of "It was like Ren! It was like Ren!"

The weight of the exclamation mark (represented by repetition in ancient texts) accompanying "It was like Ren!" cannot be overstated.

Throughout The Analects, the Master rarely bestowed the title "Ren" easily. Master Yan Hui's mind "did not deviate from Ren for three months" (Analects, Chapter 6)—note, only "three months," not perpetually. Master Ran Yong was deemed "fit to govern the South" (Analects, Chapter 9), but the Master never directly called him "Ren." Zilu and Zigong were explicitly denied the qualification of "Ren" by the Master (e.g., "As for You Zilu, if given a state of a thousand chariots, I fear he would not know how to manage its levies, much less know Ren$44" (Analects, Chapter 5)).

Yet, regarding Master Guan Zhong—a man with clear flaws in personal conduct ("Guan Zhong’s capacity was small!" "If Guan Zhong knew rites, who would not know rites$45" (Analects, Chapter 3))—the Master stated "It was like Ren!" twice!

Why$1

This requires examining Confucius’s deepest understanding of "Ren."

In the Master’s thought, "Ren" is not a unidimensional concept. It has at least three levels:

First Level: Ren as Personal Virtue. This is the level of "subduing the self and returning to propriety" (Ke Ji Fu Li) (Analects, Chapter 12)—restraining one’s behavior to conform to ritual norms. Guan Zhong had flaws at this level—his capacity was small, and he did not fully observe ritual norms.

Second Level: Ren in Interpersonal Relations. This is the level of "What you do not want done to yourself, do not do to others" (Ji Suo Bu Yu, Wu Shi Yu Ren) (Analects, Chapter 15)—embodying empathy and goodwill in relationships. Guan Zhong also had flaws here—his failure to die for his former lord was a lapse in relational loyalty.

Third Level: Ren for the People Under Heaven. This is the level of "Extending bounty to the people and aiding the masses" (Bo Shi Yu Min Er Neng Ji Zhong) (Analects, Chapter 6)—benefiting all people under Heaven. In this realm, Guan Zhong was undoubtedly a "Ren" figure—by assisting Duke Huan to unite the lords nine times without war, he saved the world from perpetual conflict, and the populace benefited from his grace.

The Master’s "It was like Ren!" is a judgment made at this third level. In the Master's view, when Ren as personal virtue conflicts with Ren for the people under Heaven, the Ren for the people under Heaven takes precedence.

This is a revolutionary judgment. It means: The highest attainment of Ren is not personal perfection, but responsibility for the world.