Gong Sun Chou II · Passage 03 / 14 · 孟子 2B.3
Mencius 2B.3: when receiving a gift is right
Mencius explains that the issue in receiving or refusing a gift is not the amount, but whether the gift fits a real need and a rightful relation.
陳臻問曰：「前日於齊，王饋兼金一百而不受；於宋，饋七十鎰而受；於薛，饋五十鎰而受。前日之不受是，則今日之受非也；今日之受是，則前日之不受非也；夫子必居一於此矣。」孟子曰：「皆是也。當在宋也，予將有遠行；行者必以贐，辭曰『饋贐』，予何為不受？當在薛也，予有戒心，辭曰『聞戒故為兵饋之』，予何為不受？若於齊則未有處也。無處而饋之，是貨之也；焉有君子而可以貨取乎？」
Chen Zhen asked Mencius, saying, 'Formerly, when you were in Qi, the king sent you a present Of 2,400 taels of fine silver, and you refused to accept it. When you were in Song, 1,680 taels were sent to you, which you accepted; and when you were in Xue, 1,200 taels were sent, which you likewise accepted. If your declining to accept the gift in the first case was right, your accepting it in the latter cases was wrong. If your accepting it in the latter cases was right, your declining to do so in the first case was wrong. You must accept, Master, one of these alternatives.' Mencius said, 'I did right in all the cases. When I was in Song, I was about to take a long journey. Travellers must be provided with what is necessary for their expenses. The prince's message was, 'A present against travelling-expenses." Why should I have declined the gift? When I was in Xue, I was apprehensive for my safety, and taking measures for my protection. The message was, "I have heard that you are taking measures to protect yourself, and send this to help you in procuring arms." Why should I have declined the gift? But when I was in Qi, I had no occasion for money. To send a man a gift when he has no occasion for it, is to bribe him. How is it possible that a superior man should be taken with a bribe?'
Priority note
A human-edited reading layer
Central question
Why does Mencius sometimes accept gifts and sometimes refuse them?
Direct answer
Because outwardly similar gifts can carry very different meanings. Travel expenses or defensive provision answer a real circumstance within propriety; an unsolicited rich gift with no rightful place is an attempt to buy the person.
First principle
To judge a resource relationship, ask what role it plays in the structure before asking how large it is.
Why it matters
This passage serves searches around gifts, integrity, and receiving or refusing support, while clarifying how Mencius distinguishes rightful provision from corrupt purchase.
Further reading
What this passage is doing
This is passage 3 of 14 in Gong Sun Chou II. The cleanest entry point is "Formerly, when you were in Qi, the king…". 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.
Broader search routes
If you came here with a wider question, start from the right hub page
Humane government: political order begins with livelihood
If your real query is broader than one citation, start from the theme page and use this passage as proof text.
Open humane government / kingly wayWho is Mencius?
If you first need the person, the aliases, and why he matters, start from the about page.
Open About MenciusMencius quotes and sayings
If you arrived through a famous line, start from the quotes hub and then return to the exact passage.
Open Mencius quotesMencius full text and works of Mencius
If you need the book structure, the works of Mencius, or where to read the text, start from the full-text hub.
Open the full-text hubBook context
Gong Sun Chou II develops flood-like qi, steadiness of character, and the public duty of the scholar.
Related principles
Citation note
The issue is not inconsistency but context. Keep the three situations—travel provision, defensive provision, and groundless rich giving—or the passage collapses into a story about personal fastidiousness.