Gong Sun Chou II · Passage 12 / 14 · 孟子 2B.12

Mencius 2B.12: he left Qi only after the last test

Mencius explains that delaying his final departure from Qi was not attachment to office but a last effort to see whether the ruler might still change.

孟子去齊，尹士語人曰：「不識王之不可以為湯、武，則是不明也；識其不可然且至，則是干澤也。千里而見王，不遇故去；三宿而後出晝，是何濡滯也！士則茲不悅。」高子以告。曰：「夫尹士惡知予哉？千里而見王，是予所欲也。不遇故去，豈予所欲哉？予不得已也。予三宿而出晝，於予心猶以為速。王庶幾改之！王如改諸，則必反予。夫出晝而王不予追也，予然後浩然有歸志。予雖然，豈舍王哉？王由足用為善；王如用予，則豈徒齊民安？天下之民舉安。王庶幾改之！予日望之！予豈若是小丈夫然哉！諫於其君而不受，則怒，悻悻然見於其面，去則窮日之力而後宿哉？」尹士聞之，曰：「士誠小人也。」

mèng zǐ qù qí， yǐn shì yǔ rén yuē：「bù shí wáng zhī bù kě yǐ wéi tāng、 wǔ， zé shì bù míng yě； shí qí bù kě rán qiě zhì， zé shì gān zé yě。 qiān lǐ ér jiàn wáng， bú yù gù qù； sān sù ér hòu chū zhòu， shì hé rú zhì yě！ shì zé zī bú yuè。」 gāo zǐ yǐ gào。 yuē：「fū yǐn shì è zhī yǔ zāi？ qiān lǐ ér jiàn wáng， shì yǔ suǒ yù yě。 bú yù gù qù， qǐ yǔ suǒ yù zāi？ yǔ bù dé yǐ yě。 yǔ sān sù ér chū zhòu， wū yǔ xīn yóu yǐ wéi sù。 wáng shù jī gǎi zhī！ wáng rú gǎi zhū， zé bì fǎn yǔ。 fū chū zhòu ér wáng bù yǔ zhuī yě， yǔ rán hòu hào rán yǒu guī zhì。 yǔ suī rán， qǐ shè wáng zāi？ wáng yóu zú yòng wéi shàn； wáng rú yòng yǔ， zé qǐ tú qí mín ān？ tiān xià zhī mín jǔ ān。 wáng shù jī gǎi zhī！ yǔ rì wàng zhī！ yǔ qǐ ruò shì xiǎo zhàng fu rán zāi！ jiàn wū qí jūn ér bú shòu， zé nù， xìng xìng rán jiàn wū qí miàn， qù zé qióng rì zhī lì ér hòu sù zāi？」 yǐn shì wén zhī， yuē：「shì chéng xiǎo rén yě。」

When Mencius had left Qi, Yin Shi spoke about him to others, saying, 'If he did not know that the king could not be made a Tang or a Wu, that showed his want of intelligence. If he knew that he could not be made such, and came notwithstanding, that shows he was seeking his own benefit. He came a thousand li to wait on the king; because he did not find in him a ruler to suit him, he took his leave, but how dilatory and lingering was his departure, stopping three nights before he quitted Zhou! I am dissatisfied on account of this.' The disciple Gao informed Mencius of these remarks. Mencius said, 'How should Yin Shi know me! When I came a thousand li to wait on the king, it was what I desired to do. When I went away because I did not find in him a ruler to suit me, was that what I desired to do? I felt myself constrained to do it. When I stopped three nights before I quitted Zhou, in my own mind I still considered my departure speedy. I was hoping that the king might change. If the king had changed, he would certainly have recalled me. When I quitted Zhou, and the king had not sent after me, then, and not till then, was my mind resolutely bent on returning to Cao. But, notwithstanding that, how can it be said that I give up the king? The king, after all, is one who may be made to do what is good. If he were to use me, would it be for the happiness of the people of Qi only ? It would be for the happiness of the people of the whole kingdom. I am hoping that the king will change. I am daily hoping for this. Am I like one of your little-minded people? They will remonstrate with their prince, and on their remonstrance not being accepted, they get angry; and, with their passion displayed in their countenance, they take their leave, and travel with all their strength for a whole day, before they will stop for the night.' When Yin Shi heard this explanation, he said, 'I am indeed a small man.'

Priority note

A human-edited reading layer

Central question

Why did Mencius remain for three nights after leaving Qi instead of cutting off at once?

Direct answer

Because he distinguishes angry withdrawal from responsible withdrawal. As long as reform remains possible, leaving should not be a performance of wounded pride.

First principle

Principled exit is not proven by speed alone. It must first determine whether any real space for correction remains.

Why it matters

This passage serves searches around leaving power, moral exit, and how Mencius judges the boundary between patience and final departure.

What this passage is doing

This is passage 12 of 14 in Gong Sun Chou II. The cleanest entry point is "How should Yin Shi know me". In context, it works as part of Mencius's argument about flood-like qi, moral judgment, and public responsibility and can be read alongside Humane government / kingly way, Flood-like qi.

Broader search routes