加密数字货币交易所-《论语》详解：给所有曲解孔子的人-子曰：放于利而行，多怨

Confucius said: “To act for profit, many resent.”

Detailed explanation: In this chapter, the seven characters contain no difficult words, yet throughout history, they have been misunderstood. Most interpretations follow Zhu Xi’s annotations in the Collected Annotations to the Analects. Zhu Xi believed: “Fang, means dependence.” According to this explanation, “Fang” is pronounced with the first tone. Later interpretations generally equate “Fang” with “indulgence,” with the basic meaning being the same—that is, considering “profit” as evil or as something that provokes “resentment.”

In reality, if “Fang” truly means “dependence,” why not simply use “依” (depend)? “依于利而行，多怨.”—wouldn’t that be clearer? In later poetic discussions, there’s the concept of the “poetry eye,” which cannot be changed in a good poem. For example, the well-known line “Spring breeze again greens the southern bank,” the word “green” cannot be replaced. In Chinese, no other character can substitute it. Although during the Analects era there was no specific term like “poetry eye,” the Analects is China’s first book, and its characters are chosen with the utmost precision and unchangeability. Imagine Lü Buwei, who gathered scholars from all schools to compile the Lüshi Chunqiu, boasting that “one character is worth a thousand gold,” and yet, changing a single character is forbidden. How much more so for the Analects, China’s first book?

“Fang” should be pronounced with the first tone, encompassing meanings of “abandon” and “indulgence.” Many might ask: aren’t “abandon” and “indulgence” opposites? In this sentence, “abandon” means not acting for “profit.” If one does not act for “profit,” how can there be indulgence? Conversely, “indulgence” means acting solely for profit, indulging in it. If one is solely profit-driven, then “abandon” doesn’t apply. “Abandon” cannot mean “indulgence,” and “indulgence” cannot mean “abandon.” These two extremes—abandoning profit and indulging in profit—are mutually exclusive. Yet, the character “Fang” contains both seemingly opposite meanings, making it the poetic eye that cannot be changed. The Analects, as China’s first book, not only holds logical principles but also demonstrates the precision and unchangeability of its characters. This “Fang” character is truly a “word with spirit.”

“To act for profit, many resent” means that whether one abandons or indulges in “profit,” the result will be “many resentments.” Today, this is easier to understand. During the planned economy era, people abandoned “profit” and faced “many resentments”; in the market economy era, indulging in “profit” also results in “many resentments.” The brilliance of this statement lies in the contrast between these two eras. Even more impressively, both opposing situations are contained within a single “Fang” character, much like Boya’s “High Mountain and Flowing Water”—a rare confidant throughout history. Here, I present an interpretation not previously offered, as a kind of “Qixi” (a reference to the legendary lovers, symbolizing a rare connection).

Both indulging in and abandoning “profit” are wrong, consistent with the spirit of the previous chapter: “When Qi unifies, it reaches Lu; when Lu unifies, it reaches the Way.” The “Qi” model represents indulgence in “profit,” while the “Lu” model represents abandoning “profit.” Both violate the fundamental principle of the “Sage’s Way”—the balance of good and evil, the combination of civil and martial virtues, the “Yin and Yang, civil and martial” principle. Therefore, it must be “Qi unifies, reaches Lu; Lu unifies, reaches the Way,” ultimately returning to the “Sage’s Way.” Moreover, “profit” does not only refer to the common understanding of “benefit.” The original meaning of “利” is “sharpness.” In a society where people are unaware, “benefit” is naturally the sharpest thing, ultimately leading to the dichotomy of rich and poor. More importantly, “profit” manifests both as static benefit and as a dynamic trend, reflecting its original meaning of “sharpness.”

Even within a society where “people are unaware,” there are levels of competence. “People are unaware” inevitably leads to “resentment,” but “less resentment” is better than “more resentment.” In modern terms, social tensions easing is better than intensifying. “To act for profit, many resent” describes a general rule of the “society of ignorance”: whether one abandons or indulges in “profit,” it will increase “resentment” and ultimately intensify social conflicts. Since “profit” is always relative, from the perspective of wealth disparity, indulging in “profit” for the rich often means abandoning “profit” for the poor, and vice versa.

To achieve the ideal of “poverty without flattery, wealth without arrogance” among people, one must absolutely adhere to the general rule of “acting for profit, many resent.” One must not abandon or indulge in “profit” but fully grasp its “benefit,” using it as a blade without being cut by it. Only then can one qualify to discuss the “non-relationship” of wealth and poverty. Otherwise, if one cannot even grasp the direction of “profit,” how can one discuss the “non-relationship” of the ultimate states of wealth and poverty? A gentleman practicing the “Sage’s Way” must first be a “knower of people.” If even oneself is “unaware,” how can one prevent the “non-relationship” of others’ ignorance? Ignorance of a matter is a shame for Confucians; failing to arm oneself with worldly knowledge disqualifies one from being a Confucian. **$FET **$FIL **$NFP **