To some one who asked his opinion of the last-named, he said, “He was a kind-hearted man.”  Asked what he thought of Tsz-si, he exclaimed, “Alas for him! alas for him!”—­Asked again about Kwan Chung, his answer was, “As to him, he once seized the town of P’in with its three hundred families from the Chief of the Pih clan, who, afterwards reduced to living upon coarse rice, with all his teeth gone, never uttered a word of complaint.”

“It is no light thing,” said he, “to endure poverty uncomplainingly; and a difficult thing to bear wealth without becoming arrogant.”

Respecting Mang Kung-ch’oh, he said that, while he was fitted for something better than the post of chief officer in the Chau or Wei families, he was not competent to act as minister in small States like those of T’ang or Sieh.

Tsz-lu asked how he would describe a perfect man.  He replied, “Let a man have the sagacity of Tsang Wu-chung, the freedom from covetousness of Kung-ch’oh, the boldness of Chwang of P’in, and the attainments in polite arts of Yen Yu; and gift him further with the graces taught by the ‘Books of Rites’ and ’Music’—­then he may be considered a perfect man.  But,” said he, “what need of such in these days?  The man that may be regarded as perfect now is the one who, seeing some advantage to himself, is mindful of righteousness; who, seeing danger, risks his life; and who, if bound by some covenant of long standing, never forgets its conditions as life goes on.”

Respecting Kung-shuh Wan, the Master inquired of Kung-ming Kia, saying, “Is it true that your master never speaks, never laughs, never takes aught from others?”

“Those who told you that of him,” said he, “have gone too far.  My master speaks when there is occasion to do so, and men are not surfeited with his speaking.  When there is occasion to be merry too, he will laugh, but men have never overmuch of his laughing.  And whenever it is just and right to take things from others, he will take them, but never so as to allow men to think him burdensome.”  “Is that the case with him?” said the Master.  “Can it be so?”

Respecting Tsang Wu-chung the Master said, “When he sought from Lu the appointment of a successor to him, and for this object held on to his possession of the fortified city of Fang—­if you say he was not then using constraint towards his prince, I must refuse to believe it.”

Duke Wan of Tsin he characterized as “artful but not upright”; and Duke Hwan of Ts’i as “upright but not artful.”

Tsz-lu remarked, “When Duke Hwan caused his brother Kiu to be put to death, Shau Hwuh committed suicide, but Kwan Chung did not.  I should say he was not a man who had much good-will in him—­eh?”

The Master replied, “When Duke Hwan held a great gathering of the feudal lords, dispensing with military equipage, it was owing to Kwan Chung’s energy that such an event was brought about.  Match such good-will as that—­match it if you can.”