This is what Matthew Arnold calls Christ s method in his teag. When the poor widow gave her mite, it was not what she gave that Christ called the attention of his hearers to, but how she gave it. The moralists said, "Thou shalt not it adultery." But Christ said, "I say unto you that whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath already itted adultery. "
In the same way the moralists in fucius time said: Children must cut firewood and carry water for their parents and yield to them the best of the food and wine in the house: that is filial peity. But fucius said, "No; that is not filial piety." True filial piety does not sist in the mere outerformance of these services to our parents. True filial piety sists in how, in what manner, with irit we perform these services. The difficulty, said fucius, is with the manner of doing it. It is, I will finally say here, by virtue of this method in his teag, of looking into the inwardness of moral as that fucius bees, not as the Christian missionaries say, a mere moralist and philosopher, but a great and true religious teacher.
As a further illustration of fucius method, take the present reform movement in a. The so-called progressive mandarins with applause from fn neers are making a great fuss_even going to Europe and America, _trying to find out what reforms to adopt in a. But unfortuhe salvation of a will not depend upon what reforms are made by these progressive mandarins, but upon how these reforms are carried out. It seems a pity that these progressive mandarins, _instead of going to Europe and America, to study stitution could not be made to stay at home and study fucius. For until these mandarins take to heart fucius teag and his method and attend to the how instead of the what in this matter of reform, nothing but isery and suffering will e out of the present reform movement in a.
The other article in Dr. Giles "Adversaria Sinica" which I will briefly examine, is entitled_ "The four classes. "
The Japanese Baron Suyematzu in an interview said that the Japanese divided their people into four classes, _soldiers, farmers, artisans and warriors. Upon this Dr. Giles says. "It is incorrect to translate shih (rb) as soldier; that is a later meaning." Dr. Giles further says, "in its earliest use the word shih (dr) referred to civilians. "
Now the truth is just oher side. In its earliest use, the word shih (dr) referred to gentlemen who in a a, as it is now in Europe, bore arms, _the noblesse of the sword. Hehe officers and soldiers of an army were spoken of as shih tsu.
The civilian official class in a a were called shi _ clericus.When the feudal system in a was abolished (. B.C. , ) and fighting ceased to be the only profession of gentlemen, this civilian official class rose into prominence, became lawyers and stituted the noblesse of the robe as distinguished from the shihthe noblesse of the sword.
H. E. the Viceroy g of Wug once asked me why the
fn suls who were civil funaries, when in full dress, wore swords. In reply I said that it was because they were shih whi a a meant not a civilian scholar, but a gentleman who bore arms and served in the army. H. E. agreed and the day gave orders that all the pupils in the schools in Wug should wear military uniform.
This question therefore which Dr. Giles has raised whether the ese word shih means a civilian or a military man has a great practical i. For the questioher a iure will be indep