Fine Japanese Calligraphy

The Art of Master Japanese Calligrapher Eri Takase

Home › Library › Philology › The Practice of Humaneness Rests on Oneself

爲仁由己 jin o nasu wa onore ni yoru The Practice of Humaneness Rests on Oneself

Japanese Scroll of The Practice of Humaneness Rests on Oneself (jin o nasu wa onore ni yoru) — Calligraphy by Eri Takase
爲仁由己 Original Scroll by Master Calligrapher Eri Takase

Abstract

爲仁由己, the practice of humaneness rests on oneself, is the third sentence of Confucius's answer to his disciple Yan Hui 顏淵, who asked him about 仁, humaneness, in the Analects 論語: 克己復禮爲仁。一日克己復禮、天下歸仁焉。爲仁由己、而由人乎哉, to restrain oneself and return to the rites is humaneness; if for one day one restrains oneself and returns to the rites, the world will turn to humaneness; the practice of humaneness rests on oneself, and how could it rest on others?, read in Japanese 仁を爲すは己に由る [1][2][3][4]. Whose self is meant has two answers, and both stand in one commentary of the sixth century: 皇侃 Huang Kan reads the line of the ruler, whose one day of practice makes the people turn to him, and 范甯 Fan Ning, whom he quotes, puts it in the first person, the practice of humaneness lies in me; how should I wait for another to practice it? [5][6]. The English translations read here mostly take it of every person, from Legge in 1861; Arthur Waley in 1938 gave it to the ruler, with no note [7][8]. The line was also a lever against Zhu Xi 朱熹: 太宰春台 Dazai Shundai and 阮元 Ruan Yuan used its 己 against his reading of 克己 as conquering selfish desire, and 貝原益軒 Kaibara Ekken, in a work prefaced in 1713, used it against his reading of 歸 [9][10][11][12]. And it has long been used alone: in a third-century elegy by 潘岳 Pan Yue, in a poem of Analects lines by 傅咸 Fu Xian, in a Jin general's call to loyalty, in a studio inscription by Zhu Xi that a Japanese handbook offers to calligraphers, and in a vow the Japanese Confucian 室鳩巣 Muro Kyūsō addressed to the spirit of 菅原道真 in 1681 [13][14][15][16][17].

A reading

I read the line, standing alone as it is sold, of anyone: the practice of humaneness rests on oneself. Inside the chapter the ruler reading has an honest footing. 皇侃 reads the sentence before the line, if for one day one restrains oneself and returns to the rites, the world will turn to humaneness, as said of a ruler, and so reads the line as the reason the people turn to him: 行仁一日而民見歸所以是由己不由他人也, he practices humaneness for one day and the people turn to him; that is why it rests on himself and not on others [5]. Waley's the ruler himself is that reading [8]. But the same commentary quotes 范甯's 言爲仁在我豈俟彼爲仁耶, it says that the practice of humaneness lies in me; how should I wait for another to practice it?, and the note the 集解 gives, 孔安國's, says only 行善在己不在人也, doing good lies in oneself, not in others [5][1]. 阮元 shows that the two need not be chosen between: he reads this chapter, with the two he sets after it, 仲弓's question on humaneness (12.2) and 樊遲's (12.22), as the way a king rules the world by humaneness (右三章皆言王者以仁治天下之道), and the word 己 as the self, the same self as in 克己 [10]. What settles it for the line alone is how it has been used alone. The uses of the line apart from its chapter read for this history, from 潘岳's elegy, written by the year 300, to 室鳩巣's vow and a Meiji chapter on self-reliance, take the self as the one who speaks or the one addressed [13][14][17][16][3]. The one exception read, a commentary on the Meiji constitution of 1889, seen only in a snippet, sets the line beside words on the sovereign's virtue, 君德ノ六合ニ浹洽シテ; the window is too short to say more [18]. The second half, 而由人乎哉, makes it a question that expects no: the practice cannot be borrowed, delegated or waited for. So I sign the line as a sentence about where the work of humaneness begins, in oneself, and give the ruler reading its place as 皇侃's, the oldest reading of the line as said of a ruler among the commentaries read here. Signed, 典.

Share this article:

X Facebook

Overview

The sense. 爲仁由己 has no entry of its own in the Japanese dictionaries read at kotobank, which enter 克己復礼 and quote the chapter's first sentence [19]. Its sense is carried by its words and by the question it opens: 爲仁 is doing humaneness, the practice of humaneness; 由己 is comes from oneself, rests on oneself; and 而由人乎哉, and does it come from others?, expects the answer no [1][20]. Zhu Xi glosses it 爲仁由己而非他人所能預、又見其機之在我而無難也, the practice of humaneness rests on oneself and is not something others can take part in; it shows too that the spring of it is in oneself, and there is no difficulty [21].

The words. 仁, humaneness, is in デジタル大辞泉 思いやり。いつくしみ。なさけ, consideration, affection, kindness, and especially 儒教における最高徳目, the highest virtue of Confucianism, a practical ethics of living with others in sympathy [22]. 爲 is to do, to practice. 由 is to come from, to rest on; in the Japanese reading 由る, yoru, and a reader of the copy of the 天文版 of 1533 at the National Diet Library glossed it ヨレリ [2]. 己 is oneself, in デジタル大辞泉 反射代名詞。その人、またはそのもの自身, a reflexive pronoun: that person or thing itself [23]. The title of this study renders 爲 as the practice of, as Legge and Lau do, and 由 as rests on, near Chin's rests with [7][24][25][26].

The text in English. James Legge in 1861: Is the practice of perfect virtue from a man himself, or is it from others? [7]. Arthur Waley in 1938: For Goodness is something that must have its source in the ruler himself; it cannot be got from others. [8]. Wing-tsit Chan in 1963: To practice humanity depends on oneself. Does it depend on others? [24]. Annping Chin in 2014: Humaneness rests with the self. How could it come from others? [26]. Each is taken in its place below.

The historical record

The text

The chapter. The Analects' chapter 顏淵 opens with Yan Hui asking about humaneness. In the 論語集解 of 何晏 He Yan, read in a reprint of 1813 of the 正平本 of 1364, the printing the library's description of the 天文版 names as the one before it among the Analects printed in Japan, the line and its note read [1][27][28]:

爲仁由己而由人乎哉 孔安國曰行善在己不在人也

"The practice of humaneness rests on oneself; how could it rest on others?" Kong Anguo said: doing good lies in oneself, not in others. The 論語義疏 of 皇侃 carries the note as 行善在己不在人者也, with a final 者, in an Edo manuscript and in the 四庫全書 text [5][6].

1533. The 天文版. The Analects printed at Sakai, whose postface is signed 天文癸巳八月乙亥 by 清原宣賢 Kiyohara no Nobukata (1475–1550), gives the white text without commentary; its block prints 爲仁由巳, with the closed form it cuts for 己 in 克巳 twice on the same page [2][29]. The National Diet Library's copy carries red points and reading marks throughout, and, by the library's description, a note of 1547 in 宣賢's own hand [27]. Beside 由 a reader's brush has written ヨレリ and beside 己 オノレ [2]; nothing read here ties that hand to 宣賢.

The Japanese reading. In print the reading 仁を爲すは己に由る appears in the National Diet Library's full-text index from 1889, in a commentary on the Meiji constitution, read here only in a snippet, where it stands beside words on the sovereign's virtue (嗚呼誠ハ我ニ在リ仁ヲ爲スハ己ニ由ル君德ノ六合ニ浹洽シテ…) [18]. The earliest read at the leaf is 亘理章三郎's 『孔門之徳育』, dated 1901 in the library's record, in a chapter on self-reliance: 『仁を爲すは己に由る、豈人によらんや』 [3]. The second half takes several forms in the books that follow, 人に由らんや, 而して人に由らんや, 豈人によらんや; the 国訳漢文大成 of 1922 gives the whole as 仁を爲すは己に由りて人に由らんや [4].

The two readings in one commentary

Sixth century. 皇侃. 皇侃 (488–545) wrote his 論語義疏, the commentary on the 集解, in the Liang [30]. It was lost in China and came back to it from Japan, in an edition 根本遜志 Nemoto Sonshi cut in the Edo period [31]. On the sentence before the line, 皇侃 says it is said of a ruler: 言人君若能一日克己復禮則天下之民咸歸於仁君也, it says that if a ruler can for one day restrain himself and return to the rites, the people of the world will all turn to the humane ruler [6]; the Edo manuscript writes the last words 人君, will all turn to the ruler [5]. The 范甯 he quotes next speaks of rulers too, on the sentence before: 亂世之主不能一日克己故言一日也, the lords of a disordered age cannot restrain themselves for one day, so it says one day [6][5]. On the line, in a manuscript of the Edo period, the line, his note, the 集解's note and his second note follow one another [5]:

爲仁由己而由人乎哉　行仁一日而民見帰所以是由己不由他人也　孔安國曰行善在己不在人者也　范甯云言爲仁在我豈俟彼爲仁耶

"The practice of humaneness rests on oneself; how could it rest on others?" He practices humaneness for one day and the people turn to him; that is why it rests on himself and not on others. Kong Anguo said: doing good lies in oneself, not in others. 范甯 says: it says that the practice of humaneness lies in me; how should I wait for another to practice it? 范甯 (339?–401?) is a scholar of the Eastern Jin [32]. So the ruler reading and the anyone reading stand side by side, the second quoted by the first.

邢昺 and 朱熹. 邢昺 Xing Bing's commentary follows 皇侃 in reading the sentence before the line of a ruler, and paraphrases the line plainly, doing good comes from oneself; how could it come from others? (豈由他人乎哉) [20]. Zhu Xi reads the line of anyone, the spring of it is in oneself (機之在我) [21].

The line as a lever

The line has been argued from three times, each time on a different word of the chapter.

己. Zhu Xi glosses 己 in 克己 as 身之私慾, the body's selfish desires, and says of our line that its spring is in oneself (機之在我) [21]. 毛奇齡 Mao Qiling objected that the Analects has not two kinds of 己: 現有為仁由己己字在下而一作身解一作私解其可通乎, here is 爲仁由己, with 己 just below; if one is read as the self and the other as selfish desire, can that hold? [33]. In Japan 荻生徂徠 Ogyū Sorai made the same point (訓己爲身。與下文由己相應, reading 己 as the self answers to the 由己 below) [34], and so did his pupil 太宰春台 (1680–1747) [35], whose note a manuscript commentary on his 論語古訓 carries [9]:

朱注以己爲身之私欲。尤非也。下云爲仁由己。可謂爲仁由身之私欲哉。克己之己。卽由己之己。豈有異義哉。

Zhu's note takes 己 as the body's selfish desires; that is most wrong. Below it says 爲仁由己: could one say the practice of humaneness rests on the body's selfish desires? The 己 of 克己 is the 己 of 由己; how could they differ in sense? In 1823 阮元 printed the argument in his 揅經室集 [10]: 若以克己字解爲私欲、則下文爲仁由己之己斷不能再解爲私、而由己不由人反詰辭氣與上文不相屬矣, if 克己 is read as selfish desire, the 己 of 爲仁由己 below can in no way be read as selfish again, and the rhetorical turn of 由己不由人 would not connect with what goes before; and he quotes a scholar he names 凌次仲敎授, 豈可曰爲仁由私欲乎, could one say the practice of humaneness rests on selfish desire? [10].

歸. 貝原益軒 Kaibara Ekken (1630–1714) [36], in his 大疑錄, A Record of Great Doubts, whose preface he signed in the spring of 正德癸巳, 1713, at eighty-four [12], turns the line on the sentence before it. If 歸 meant that the world grants a man humaneness, humaneness would rest on others' praise [11]:

夫爲仁之道。不以人之稱許。故曰。爲仁由己。而由人乎哉。

The way of humaneness does not take men's praise for its measure; so it is said, the practice of humaneness rests on oneself; how could it rest on others? To read 歸 as the world's granting, he says, 卻是不由己而由人也, would make it rest not on oneself but on others, and he reads 歸 as coming home to humaneness instead (歸宿) [11]. Mary Evelyn Tucker's English of 2007 gives the line here as The source of humaneness is in oneself; it cannot be gotten from others [37].

Autonomy. 貝塚茂樹 Kaizuka Shigeki's note to his translation of 1966, read here in a snippet and as a high-school teacher of classical Chinese quoted it in 1975 in teaching the chapter, says that because the chapter could be taken to mean obeying from outside the rules of society, rules that exist apart from oneself, Confucius said 爲仁由己, so that humaneness is obeying the rites from within: 社会の規律、客観的に存在する規律に他律的に服従することを意味するととられるおそれがあるので孔子は為仁由己といって、礼の規律に自律的に服従するのが仁徳であると断わっている [38][39].

The line alone

The Jin. 傅咸, 潘岳 and 溫嶠. The anthology 藝文類聚 keeps a poem made of Analects lines by 傅咸 Fu Xian of the Jin: 克己復禮。學優則仕。富貴在天。爲仁由己。以道事君。死而後已。 [17]. In the elegy of 潘岳 (247–300), a poet of the Western Jin, for his friend 夏侯湛 Xiahou Zhan, the poet recalls warning him that the age hates the outstanding, and Xiahou answers with the line [13][40]:

子乃洗然，變色易容。慨焉嘆曰：道固不同。為仁由己，匪我求蒙。

Then you, startled, changed color and countenance, and sighed: our ways are not the same. The practice of humaneness rests on oneself; it is not I who go seeking the ignorant. The Tang commentator 李善 Li Shan notes the Analects and the 易's 匪我求童蒙 [13]. The 1922 Japanese reading of the elegy: 仁を爲すは己に由る。我蒙に求むるに匪ず [4].

In the 晉書, the history of the Jin, the general 溫嶠 Wen Jiao's proclamation against 蘇峻 and 祖約 ends 夫忠爲令德、爲仁由己、萬里一契、義不在言也, loyalty is the fine virtue, and the practice of humaneness rests on oneself; ten thousand miles are of one bond, and duty does not lie in words [14].

Zhu Xi's inscription and 林希逸. Zhu Xi set the line inside an inscription for a studio named 依仁, relying on humaneness: 擧之莫能勝。行之莫能至。雖欲依之。安得而依之。爲仁由己。而由人乎哉。雖欲違之。安得而違之。 The 墨場必携, a handbook of phrases for the brush compiled by 市河米庵 Ichikawa Beian (1779–1858), prints it under Zhu's four studio inscriptions; it is read here in a new annotated edition of 1938, whose note says 仁の道を行ふは自身に在るので、決して人に由るのではない [15]. 林希逸 Lin Xiyi's commentary on the Laozi, in a Japanese print of 1648, uses the line to say that the Way is in oneself: 求則得之。道本在我。爲仁由己由人乎哉 [41].

1681. 室鳩巣's vow. 室鳩巣 (1658–1734) [42] wrote a vow to the spirit of 菅原道真, dated in its own opening 延寶辛酉二月壬寅, which a study of 1905 quotes from his collected writings; the editors of an annotated anthology of 1917 date it to 延寶九年, that is 天和元年, when he was 年二十四, twenty-four by the Japanese count, which with his birth in 1658 is 1681 [16][43][42]. It opens with that date and an address to the spirit of 菅原道真 (謹告于菅相公靈), tells of his schooling since boyhood, and turns to the line in its last paragraph [43][16]:

夫雖爲仁由己、不可他求、然使人有所畏有所信、而不敢自欺焉、非神之聰明正直者、其誰能之。

Though the practice of humaneness rests on oneself and cannot be sought from others, yet to make a man stand in awe and in faith, so that he dares not deceive himself, who could do it but a god, keen of ear and eye and upright? The 1905 study and the anthology both print 聰明, keen of ear and eye, and the anthology glosses it そうめい [16][43]. In the anthology a set of rules for his day, 自警條目, follows the vow [43].

1901. Self-reliance. 亘理 sets the line beside 9.19, it is like building a mountain, under the margin head 進步は獨立を以て始まる, progress begins with independence [3].

The line in English

1861. James Legge. The Chinese Classics, vol. I, p. 114: Is the practice of perfect virtue from a man himself, or is it from others? His note on p. 115 says that in Ho An 何晏 the sentence before the line supposes the exemplar to be a prince, and that the line is designed to teach that every man may attain to this virtue for himself [7].

1910. W. E. Soothill. For has Virtue its source in oneself, or is it forsooth derived from others? [44].

1938. Arthur Waley. The Analects of Confucius, p. 162: If (a ruler) could for one day 'himself submit to ritual,' everyone under Heaven would respond to his Goodness. For Goodness is something that must have its source in the ruler himself; it cannot be got from others. His first note on the page is on 克己, and none is on this line [8]. It is 皇侃's reading, given with no source named.

1963. Wing-tsit Chan. A Source Book in Chinese Philosophy, p. 38, brackets the ruler on the sentence before the line and reads the line of oneself: If a man (the ruler) can for one day master himself and return to propriety, all under heaven will return to humanity. To practice humanity depends on oneself. Does it depend on others? [24].

1979 to 2014. D. C. Lau: However, the practice of benevolence depends on oneself alone, and not on others [25]. Edward Slingerland in 2003: The key to achieving Goodness lies within yourself—how could it come from others? [45]. Burton Watson in 2007: Being humane proceeds from you yourself. How could it proceed from others? [46]. Annping Chin in 2014: Humaneness rests with the self. How could it come from others?, adding that most of the traditional discussion is about 克己復禮 [26].

What is not a source

The line is not a saying of its own: it is the third sentence of a chapter, and every commentary read here reads it with the chapter [1][5][20][21]. The four characters are not a Japanese coinage; the reading 仁を爲すは己に由る is the Japanese way of reading the Chinese [3].

Notes

己 and 巳. The block of the 天文版 of 1533 cuts 己 closed at the top, like 巳, and 阮元's print of 1823 and the 1813 reprint of the 正平本 cut it like 已, throughout; each is the block's form of 己, not a variant reading, and the National Diet Library's text layer reads the 天文版's as 已 [2][10].

The 天文版's glosses. That the copy's reading marks are the 清原 house reading cannot be said from what was read: the library's description names 宣賢's note of 1547, not the hand of the glosses [27].

The 集解 note. 行善在己不在人也 in the 1813 reprint of the 正平本; 行善在己不在人者也 in the 義疏 manuscript and the 四庫全書 text [1][5][6].

Share this article:

X Facebook

Japanese Scrolls by Master Calligrapher Eri Takase

Japanese Scroll of The Practice of Humaneness Rests on Oneself (jin o nasu wa onore ni yoru) in a block font by Master Japanese Calligrapher Eri Takase
爲仁由己VB5JBlock
Japanese Scroll of The Practice of Humaneness Rests on Oneself (jin o nasu wa onore ni yoru) in a cursive font by Master Japanese Calligrapher Eri Takase
爲仁由己VC5JCursive
Japanese Scroll of The Practice of Humaneness Rests on Oneself (jin o nasu wa onore ni yoru) in Master Japanese Calligrapher Eri Takase's own style (Eri's Choice)
爲仁由己VD5JEri's Choice
Japanese Scroll of The Practice of Humaneness Rests on Oneself (jin o nasu wa onore ni yoru) in a semi-cursive font by Master Japanese Calligrapher Eri Takase
爲仁由己VS5JSemi-Cursive

Sources not seen

長田新, 「自由の世界史觀」, 『教育学研究』 17(3), 1949, which the J-STAGE index finds carrying the line; its PDF did not open (server error, three tries).

The 正平版 of 1364 itself, read here in the reprint of 1813; 根本遜志's print of the 義疏, read here in an Edo manuscript; 太宰春台's printed 論語古訓, read here through a manuscript commentary.

The note of 1547 in the National Diet Library's 天文版, read here only as the library describes it.

貝塚茂樹's note in full, read here only in a snippet and as a teacher quoted it in 1975.

A reader with access to any of these is invited to write to Takase Studios at Tim@Takase.com.

References

  1. 何晏, 『論語集解』 顏淵第十二, the 正平本 reprinted with 市野光彦's 『正平本論語札記』, 1813, scan 14, at the National Diet Library. https://dl.ndl.go.jp/pid/2546275/1/14
  2. 『論語』 10巻, 阿佐井野氏, 泉南, the 天文版 (postface 天文癸巳, 1533), 顏淵第十二, scan 48, and the postface, scan 91, at the National Diet Library. https://dl.ndl.go.jp/pid/1288426/1/48
  3. 亘理章三郎, 『孔門之徳育』, pp. 104–105, scan 64, at the National Diet Library (dated 1901 in the library's record). https://dl.ndl.go.jp/pid/753255/1/64
  4. 『国訳漢文大成』 文学部 国訳文選 下巻, 1922, 潘岳 「夏侯常侍の誄」, p. 694 and note 四七, scan 355, at the National Diet Library. https://dl.ndl.go.jp/pid/1912835/1/355
  5. 皇侃, 『論語義疏』 10卷, an Edo manuscript, 顏淵, scan 67, at the National Diet Library. https://dl.ndl.go.jp/pid/2546271/1/67
  6. 皇侃, 『論語集解義疏』 卷六, 顏淵, at Chinese Wikisource (四庫全書本). https://zh.wikisource.org/wiki/論語集解義疏_(四庫全書本)/卷06
  7. James Legge, The Chinese Classics, vol. I, Confucian Analects, The Great Learning, and The Doctrine of the Mean, Trübner, London, 1861, Book XII, chapter 1, pp. 114–115, the text and the notes, at the Internet Archive. https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.59056/page/n264
  8. Arthur Waley, The Analects of Confucius, George Allen & Unwin, London, 1938, Book XII, 1, p. 162, at the Internet Archive. https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.59196/page/n160
  9. 太宰春台's note (純按), in 西山元文, 『論語古訓國字解』, a manuscript catalogued as of about the 寛政 era, 克己復禮爲仁, scans 5–6, at the National Diet Library. https://dl.ndl.go.jp/pid/2560600/1/6
  10. 阮元, 『揅經室一集』 卷八, 論語論仁論, 1823 (preface), scans 58, 59 and 62, at the National Diet Library. https://dl.ndl.go.jp/pid/2582047/1/58, https://dl.ndl.go.jp/pid/2582047/1/59 and https://dl.ndl.go.jp/pid/2582047/1/62
  11. 貝原益軒, 『大疑錄』 卷之下, 論天下歸仁, in 井上哲次郎 and 蟹江義丸, editors, 『日本倫理彙編』 朱子學派下, pp. 231–233, scans 121–122, at the National Diet Library (dated 1902 in the library's record). https://dl.ndl.go.jp/pid/1913319/1/122
  12. 貝原益軒, 「大疑錄序」, in 益軒会, editor, 『益軒全集』 巻之二, 1911, p. 150, scan 80, at the National Diet Library. https://dl.ndl.go.jp/pid/754750/1/80
  13. 潘岳, 「夏侯常侍誄」, with 李善's notes, 『昭明文選』 卷57, at Chinese Wikisource. https://zh.wikisource.org/wiki/昭明文選/卷57
  14. 『晉書』 卷67, 溫嶠傳, at Chinese Wikisource. https://zh.wikisource.org/wiki/晉書/卷067
  15. 市河米庵, compiler, 『墨場必携 : 新註』, 洛東書院, 1938, 宋朱文公四齋銘, 依仁, p. 817, scan 428, at the National Diet Library. https://dl.ndl.go.jp/pid/1033232/1/428
  16. 井上哲次郎, 『日本朱子学派之哲学』, 1905, p. 167, which titles the piece 「祈菅神自警文」, scan 97, at the National Diet Library. https://dl.ndl.go.jp/pid/754791/1/97
  17. 傅咸, 「論語詩」, in 『藝文類聚』 卷55, at Chinese Wikisource. https://zh.wikisource.org/wiki/藝文類聚/卷055
  18. 北村三郎, 『帝国憲法正解』, 石川商店, 1889 (snippet view, National Diet Library). https://dl.ndl.go.jp/pid/2385895
  19. 「克己復礼」, デジタル大辞泉 and 精選版 日本国語大辞典, at kotobank. https://kotobank.jp/word/克己復礼-502442
  20. 何晏, 集解, and 邢昺, 疏, 『論語註疏』 卷十二, 顏淵第十二, at Chinese Wikisource. https://zh.wikisource.org/wiki/論語註疏/卷12
  21. 朱熹, 『四書章句集註』, 論語集注卷六, 顏淵第十二, at Chinese Wikisource. https://zh.wikisource.org/wiki/四書章句集註/論語集注卷六
  22. 「仁」, デジタル大辞泉, at kotobank. https://kotobank.jp/word/仁-81299
  23. 「己」, デジタル大辞泉, at kotobank. https://kotobank.jp/word/己-453569
  24. Wing-tsit Chan, translator, A Source Book in Chinese Philosophy, Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1963, p. 38, 12:1 and notes 128–130.
  25. D. C. Lau, translator, The Analects (Lun yü), Penguin Classics, Harmondsworth, 1979, XII.1 and the introduction, read in the text layer of the shelf copy.
  26. Annping Chin, translator, The Analects, Penguin Books, New York, 2014, 12.1 and its commentary, read in the text layer of the shelf copy.
  27. The National Diet Library's record of the 天文版 『論語』 10巻, its description of the copy (天文16年（1547）11月の宣賢自筆識語; 全巻にわたり朱点、訓点を付し). https://dl.ndl.go.jp/pid/1288426
  28. 「正平版論語」, 旺文社日本史事典 and 世界大百科事典, at kotobank. https://kotobank.jp/word/正平版論語-2129998
  29. 「清原宣賢」, デジタル大辞泉 and 精選版 日本国語大辞典, at kotobank. https://kotobank.jp/word/清原宣賢-16121
  30. 「皇侃」, at kotobank. https://kotobank.jp/word/皇侃-448778
  31. 「論語義疏」, 改訂新版 世界大百科事典 (金谷治), at kotobank. https://kotobank.jp/word/論語義疏-1218138
  32. 「范寧」, at kotobank. https://kotobank.jp/word/范寧-118547
  33. 毛奇齡, 『論語稽求篇』 卷五, 顏淵問仁, at Chinese Wikisource (四庫全書本). https://zh.wikisource.org/wiki/論語稽求篇_(四庫全書本)/卷5
  34. 荻生徂徠, 『論語徵』, 顏淵問仁章, in 関儀一郎, editor, 『日本名家四書註釈全書』 論語部5, 東洋図書刊行会, scan 127, pp. 236–237, at the National Diet Library. https://dl.ndl.go.jp/pid/970540/1/127
  35. 「太宰春台」, デジタル大辞泉, 精選版 日本国語大辞典 and 日本大百科全書 (ニッポニカ) (小島康敬), at kotobank. https://kotobank.jp/word/太宰春台-93204
  36. 「貝原益軒」 and 「大疑録」, at kotobank. https://kotobank.jp/word/貝原益軒-15644 and https://kotobank.jp/word/大疑録-91009
  37. Mary Evelyn Tucker, translator, The Philosophy of Qi: The Record of Great Doubts, by Kaibara Ekken, Columbia University Press, New York, 2007, Returning the World to Humaneness, and note 192, read in the text layer of the shelf copy.
  38. 貝塚茂樹, 『世界の名著』 3 孔子・孟子, 中央公論社, 1966 (snippet view, National Diet Library). https://dl.ndl.go.jp/pid/2935145
  39. 稲益俊男, 「今日の状況と文学教育の方法 : 漢文教育を中心にして」, 『日本文学』 24(5), 1975, p. 37, and the byline on p. 39, （いなます・としお／福岡県立大里高等学校）. https://doi.org/10.20620/nihonbungaku.24.5_31
  40. 「潘岳」, at kotobank. https://kotobank.jp/word/潘岳-117866
  41. 林希逸, 『老子鬳斎口義』, 林道春 句讀, 豊興堂, 1648, chapter 62, scan 83, at the National Diet Library. https://dl.ndl.go.jp/pid/2539547/1/83
  42. 「室鳩巣」, at kotobank. https://kotobank.jp/word/室鳩巣-17058
  43. 室鳩巣, 「祈菅神自誓文」 (so titled at its head, with the ruby みづからちかふぶん, p. 419), in 岡田正之 and 佐久節, 『本朝名家詩文 : 訓釈』, 1917, pp. 419–423, scans 234–236, at the National Diet Library. https://dl.ndl.go.jp/pid/968966/1/236
  44. William Edward Soothill, The Analects of Confucius, Shansi, 1910, Book XII, chapter 1, read in the text layer of the Paragon Book Reprint edition, New York, 1968, at the Internet Archive. https://archive.org/details/analectsofconfuc0000conf_u3x5
  45. Edward Slingerland, translator, Analects: With Selections from Traditional Commentaries, Hackett, Indianapolis, 2003, p. 125, 12.1, read in the text layer of the shelf copy.
  46. Burton Watson, translator, The Analects of Confucius, Columbia University Press, New York, 2007, 12.1, read in the text layer of the shelf copy.

Authors

Tim Jackowski (Systems Architect, Takase Studios, LLC) · 典 Ten (Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5, Takase Studios, LLC)

AI written · Ten wrote the history. Tim Jackowski commissioned it and answers for it.

Checked · the writer (Claude), 2026-11-03, citations: every address in the history run through the citation checker; the two that differed judged at the page (Waley's page number, the 墨場必携 note's OCR), both standing, and the 義疏's 人君 against the 四庫 text's 仁君 added; addresses the checker could not open were opened at the leaf in the reading sittings; not a fresh-context check · two fresh-context readers (Claude), 2026-11-03, every claim in the page's summary block traced to its source: round 1 FAIL from both on one wrong fact (the vow reaches the line in its last paragraph, not its first), corrected at the leaf with 聰明 read at full resolution; round 2 PASS from both, no wrong fact; their wordings applied (范甯 as the first person, Legge's own words, the two readings with their dates), and 阮元's three chapters (12.1, 12.2, 12.22) and the 貝塚 quotation corrected at the leaf

Research depth: step 3 of our 10-step ladder, foundation complete · November 2026

Cite as: Tim Jackowski and Ten, "Philology of 爲仁由己 (jin o nasu wa onore ni yoru)," Takase Studios, 2026, https://takase.com/library/philology/jin-o-nasu-wa-onore-ni-yoru.