加密数字货币交易所-《论语》详解：给所有曲解孔子的人-子曰：贫而无怨难；富而无骄易

Cryptocurrency Exchange - Detailed Explanation of “The Analects”: To all those who distort Confucius - The Master said: “Being poor and without complaints is difficult; being rich and without arrogance is easy.”

The Master said: “Being poor and without complaints is difficult; being rich and without arrogance is easy.”

Detailed explanation: Both of these chapters mention the issue of the “contrast” between “poverty and wealth,” but they approach it from the perspective of “accepting poverty” and “finding joy in the way.” However, this does not mean that poverty is good or that wealth is bad. Both “poverty and wealth” are “comparative.” For a gentleman who follows the “Way of the Sage,” the only question regarding “poverty and wealth” is how to face them, not whether they are good or bad. Neither “poverty” nor “wealth” affects the practice of the “Way of the Sage.” The “Way of the Sage” is the Great Path, not the exclusive domain of any particular group. Whether poor or rich, all are equal; no one has priority.

“Poverty” and “wealth” exist in any real society and concern everyone, especially in societies with unequal wealth distribution, where the problem becomes even more prominent. But the understanding here should not be limited to wealth alone; for example, there are “poverty and wealth” issues in knowledge, in the distribution of power and rights. Any society composed of real people cannot be perfectly equal in all aspects. As long as there is inequality, the issues of “poverty and wealth” will inevitably arise—whether in wealth, knowledge, power, or rights. These problems are unavoidable.

However, since ancient times, the character “难” (difficult) in this chapter has been read as a level tone, leading to the punctuation being interpreted as “Poverty without complaints, difficult; wealth without arrogance, easy.” For example, Zhu Xi and others read “难” as the “difficult” in “difficulty and ease,” making the meaning: “Being poor and without complaints is difficult; being rich and without arrogance is easy.” If this were human nature, then the statement would be trivial. But in reality, such an interpretation is not even worth calling nonsense—it’s just lies. Historically, the poor often remain cheerful, while the rich are arrogant and unreasonable, trying to eliminate the poor entirely. The traditional punctuation and interpretation of this chapter are incorrect.

The correct punctuation should be: “Poverty and without complaints, difficult; wealth and without arrogance, easy.” The key here is “难” (difficult), which is not a level tone, and “易” (easy) does not mean “easy” in the usual sense. Let’s start with “怨” (resentment). Shallow resentment is “complaint,” deeper resentment is “hatred,” and once “resentment” occurs, it becomes “enmity.” In ancient times, “怨” (resentment) included meanings like “complaint,” “hatred,” and “enemy.” From “怨” (resentment), one can generate “难” (difficulty). What is “难”? As a departing tone, it means “opposition, rebellion, disaster.” Resentment can lead to “enmity,” “opposition,” or even “rebellion,” which are disasters.

“骄” (arrogance) originally meant “robust” or “strong.” Wealthy people, believing themselves to be “robust,” develop “arrogance,” which can escalate to “pride,” “haughtiness,” and ultimately “intensity.” In ancient times, “骄” (arrogance) encompassed meanings like “robust,” “proud,” “haughty,” “arrogant,” and “intense.” “易” (ease) does not mean “easy” here; its original meaning is “to give” or “to bestow.” Wealthy people, believing their wealth is “bestowed” by heaven or earned through their talents and efforts, develop “contempt” and “neglect,” which can spread in society. “Bestow,” “exchange,” “contempt,” “neglect,” and “spread” are all contained within “易.”

A gentleman practicing the “Way of the Sage” aims to transform a world where “people do not know” into a world where “people do not resent.” The premise of “people do not resent” is “people do not compare.” In specific social existence, including wealth, knowledge, power, and rights, the broad concept of “poverty and wealth” is the greatest “contrast.” This contrast manifests as “poverty and resentment are difficult; wealth and arrogance are easy” in any society where “people do not know.” To practice the “Way of the Sage” and turn a world of “people do not know” into one of “people do not resent,” the primary task is to address how to make the “contrast” of “poverty and wealth” become “not contrasting,” that is, to achieve “poverty without complaints, difficult; wealth without arrogance, easy.” This is the strategy for dealing with the “contrast” of “poverty and wealth.”

Achieving “poverty without complaints, difficult; wealth without arrogance, easy” is not something that can be accomplished simply by an authority, a leader, issuing a proposal or preaching. Nor can it be achieved by coercive or seductive means to transform people into new individuals with the mindset of “poverty without complaints, difficult; wealth without arrogance, easy,” masking the unavoidable reality of the “contrast” of “poverty and wealth.” Instead, it must be realized within the reality of “poverty and wealth” through various practical means—economic, political, legal, cultural—to achieve the “not contrasting” of “poverty and wealth.”

For the “Analects” and Confucianism, “not contrasting” is a necessary step between “people do not know” and “people do not resent.” “Not contrasting” means “comparing without comparing,” not relying on “comparison.” First, we must acknowledge the existence of “comparison.” Because “comparison” exists, there is a need for “not contrasting.” For example, regarding the contrast of “poverty and wealth,” its existence is objective. Denying this existence is like closing one’s eyes and deceiving oneself—it’s not “not contrasting,” but rather “comparing” seriously. True “not contrasting” involves directly facing the existence of the “contrast” of “poverty and wealth,” and in social, economic, political, legal, and cultural aspects, not relying on the “contrast” itself, but rather making the “contrast” “not contrasting.”

What does “not contrasting” in social, economic, political, legal, and cultural aspects mean? It means adopting fairness and treating everyone equally. Neither “poverty” nor “wealth” should be a reason for favoritism. There should also be “not contrasting” between “poverty” and “wealth,” and they should be viewed equally. Those who act “unjustly for wealth” must be firmly opposed, because they take “wealth” as the contrast, so they must be “not contrasting” with respect to their “wealth” and have their “wealth” taken away. Those who “look down on poverty” should be “respected and valued” for their “poverty,” because they take “poverty” as the contrast, so they must be “not contrasting,” and their “poverty” should be removed. Those who “use poverty to commit theft” must be decisively opposed, because they take “poverty” as the contrast, so they must be “not contrasting,” and their “poverty” should be removed.

It must be reiterated that the “poverty and wealth” here do not only refer to wealth; for example, “poverty and wealth” in terms of power also exist, such as the distinction between officials and civilians, or the ruling class and the ruled. Ultimately, only by achieving the “not contrasting” of “poverty and wealth” in the broad sense—“poverty without complaints, difficult; wealth without arrogance, easy”—can true “not contrasting” be realized. Otherwise, it would just be “changing the flag on the city wall,” a superficial change that does not address the core issue. This topic is very broad, and many chapters in the “Analects” discuss it; further discussion will be continued.

**$BONK **$KMNO **$ZK **