King Hui of Liang II · Passage 02 / 16 · 孟子 1B.2
Mencius 1B.2: Why was King Wen's park seventy
Mencius uses King Wen's park to argue that the issue is not size by itself, but whether benefits are shared with the people or enclosed for power.
齊宣王問曰：「文王之囿方七十里，有諸？」孟子對曰：「於傳有之。」曰：「若是其大乎？」曰：「民猶以為小也。」曰：「寡人之囿方四十里，民猶以為大，何也？」曰：「文王之囿方七十里，芻蕘者往焉，雉兔者往焉，與民同之。民以為小，不亦宜乎？臣始至於境，問國之大禁，然後敢入。臣聞郊關之內有囿方四十里，殺其麋鹿者如殺人之罪，則是方四十里為阱於國中。民以為大，不亦宜乎？」
The king Xuan of Qi asked, 'Was it so, that the park of king Wen contained seventy square li?' Mencius replied, 'It is so in the records.' 'Was it so large as that?' exclaimed the king. 'The people,' said Mencius, 'still looked on it as small.' The king added, 'My park contains only forty square li, and the people still look on it as large. How is this?' 'The park of king Wen,' was the reply, 'contained seventy square li, but the grass-cutters and fuel-gatherers had the privilege of entrance into it; so also had the catchers of pheasants and hares. He shared it with the people, and was it not with reason that they looked on it as small? When I first arrived at the borders of your kingdom, I inquired about the great prohibitory regulations, before I would venture to enter it; and I heard, that inside the barrier-gates there was a park of forty square lî, and that he who killed a deer in it, was held guilty of the same crime as if he had killed a man. Thus those forty square li are a pitfall in the middle of the kingdom. Is it not with reason that the people look upon them as large?'
Priority note
A human-edited reading layer
Central question
Why was King Wen's park seventy square li yet the people still thought it small, while King Xuan's smaller park felt too large?
Direct answer
Because people do not experience size as a number alone. They experience whether a space is open to their life or fenced against it. King Wen's park was shared with the people, so even its scale did not feel oppressive; King Xuan's park excluded them, so even less size felt like occupation.
First principle
Institutions should not be judged only by how many resources they consume, but by whether those resources are shared with the people or monopolized by the few.
Why it matters
This passage serves searches around King Wen's park, shared benefit, and Mencius on public goods. It is a vivid example of humane government embodied in resource use.
Further reading
What this passage is doing
This is passage 2 of 16 in King Hui of Liang II. The cleanest entry point is "Was it so, that the park of king…". In context, it works as part of Mencius's argument about shared joy with the people, judgments about war, and political 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
King Hui of Liang II places shared joy, war, and the ruler's responsibility inside one political chain of judgment.
Related principles
Citation note
Do not read it as a simple attack on luxury. Mencius is not saying smaller is always better. He is saying that even something large can be just if it is truly shared, while even something smaller can be unjust if it is enclosed.