Is the Analects and the History of the Interpretation of the Analects Consistent?: Focusing on Confucius' Conflicting Evaluations of Guanzhong 管仲

In the Analects, we can find passages where Confucius appears to be inconsistent; one of the representative examples is Confucius’ evaluation of Guanzhong. This paper examines whether Confucius’ seemingly conflicting evaluations can be understood consistently, and how the Lunyu jizhu 論語集註 (Collected Annotations of the Analects), the most influential text in understanding the Analects, interprets these clashing remarks. In this process, I discussed how neo-Confucian scholars interpret the opposing assessments of qixiao 器小 (being small-minded) and ruqiren 如其仁 (being humane) that Confucius had given to Guanzhong. I also examined whether the neo-Confucian scholars’ interpretations, which understand Confucius’ conflicting opinions consistently, are supported by sound reasoning or evidence. In addition, I defended the consistency of Confucius’ evaluation by arguing that the views suggesting Confucius’ remarks on Guanzhong is inconsistent misunderstand Confucius’ intention, not deeply considering Confucius’ own diagnosis and prescription of the situation in the late Spring and Autumn period. I also argued for the consistency of Confucius’ evaluation based on comprehensive and cross-checking readings of other remarks in the Analects.