聞分館君 Ask BunKanKun

郭店楚墓竹書‧魯穆公問子思

4 min read

Text ID
KR2p0151
Date
-400–-300
Dynasty
周

Guōdiàn Chǔmù Zhúshū‧Lǔ Mùgōng Wèn Zǐsī 郭店楚墓竹書‧魯穆公問子思

Chu Tomb Bamboo Books from Guōdiàn — “Duke Mù of Lǔ Asks Zǐsī”

(子思 Zǐsī as protagonist; anonymous author)

About the work

A short philosophical dialogue in which Duke Mù of Lǔ 魯穆公 (r. 415–383 BCE) poses a question about the nature of loyal ministers (zhōng chén 忠臣) to Zǐsī 子思 (子思, Kǒng Jǐ 孔伋, grandson of Confucius). The text is a key witness to the early Confucian “Zǐsī school” (Zǐsī pài 子思派) and is recovered from Guōdiàn 郭店 Chu Tomb 1, Jīngmén, Húběi (sealed ca. 300 BCE). The source file labels it “郭店楚簡六《魯穆公問子思》” (Guōdiàn Chu Slips, text 6: Lǔ Mùgōng Wèn Zǐsī).

Abstract

Provenance. Guōdiàn Tomb 1, Jīngmén, Húběi, ca. 300 BCE. For archaeological background see KR2p0148. The text was published in the editio princeps (荊門市博物館, 《郭店楚墓竹書》, 文物出版社, 1998).

Content. The dialogue is brief but memorable. Duke Mù asks Zǐsī: “What kind of person can be called a loyal minister (zhōng chén 忠臣)?” Zǐsī replies: “One who constantly (qì 亟) points out (chēng 稱) the ruler’s faults (è 惡) can be called a loyal minister.” The duke, displeased, withdraws after bowing. Chéng Sūn Yì 成孫弋 then enters. The duke tells him what Zǐsī said and confesses he finds it puzzling. Chéng Sūn Yì responds in admiration: “Ah, well spoken indeed! There have always been those who die for the sake of their ruler; but those who constantly point out the ruler’s faults — there have never been such. Those who die for the ruler do so because of emolument and rank; those who constantly point out the ruler’s faults do so at a distance from emolument and rank. To act righteously while at a distance from emolument and rank — were it not for Zǐsī, I would never have heard of such a thing.”

This dialogue epitomizes the Zǐsī school’s view of the loyal minister as one who remonstrates against the ruler’s shortcomings, even at cost to oneself — a position that stands in creative tension with the more common view that loyalty means self-sacrifice for the ruler’s person.

Relationship to received texts. The dialogue has no close parallel in the received Lǐjì, Lùnyǔ, or Zhōngyōng, but thematic parallels appear in the Shuōyuàn 說苑 and Kǒngzǐ jiāyǔ 孔子家語. The emphasis on frank remonstrance as the highest form of loyalty recurs in other Guōdiàn texts, notably KR2p0155 (Zūn Dé Yì 尊德義). The text is one of the primary pieces of evidence for the character of Zǐsī’s thought and his engagement with the political realities of his time (he is said in the sources to have had repeated dealings with Duke Mù of Lǔ).

Attribution and significance. The text is now almost universally attributed to the Zǐsī school of early Confucianism. Its discovery confirmed what some scholars had argued on the basis of the received sources — that Zǐsī articulated a distinctive position on ruler–minister relations that would be influential in the Mèngzǐ tradition.

Dating. The manuscript was copied ca. 300 BCE. The composition of the text is probably fourth century BCE (in the lifetime of or shortly after Zǐsī, trad. d. 402 BCE); the bracket notBefore: −400, notAfter: −300 is conservative.

Translations and research

  • 荊門市博物館, 《郭店楚墓竹書》, 文物出版社, 1998 — editio princeps.
  • Cook, Scott. The Bamboo Texts of Guodian: A Study and Complete Translation. 2 vols. Cornell East Asia Series, 2012 — includes translation of Lǔ Mùgōng wèn Zǐsī.
  • Holloway, Kenneth. Guodian: The Newly Discovered Seeds of Chinese Religious and Political Philosophy. Oxford University Press, 2009.
  • Perkins, Franklin. Heaven and Earth Are Not Humane: The Problem of Evil in Classical Chinese Philosophy. Indiana University Press, 2014 — contextualizes Zǐsī’s ethical thought.
  • Pines, Yuri. Envisioning Eternal Empire: Chinese Political Thought of the Warring States Era. University of Hawai’i Press, 2009 — chapter on loyal remonstrance and ruler–minister ethics is directly relevant.

Graph View

Backlinks