“The greatness of a sage lies precisely in the fact that he is fundamentally similar to others. Therefore, a person must strive to become a sage before they can truly say, ‘I am also human.’ Only then can they speak of completing the self within humanity. This profound significance will become increasingly true and universal with the advancement of human culture.
The discussion above on how to complete the self focuses on the completion of virtue and character. When it comes to the completion of undertakings and conduct, it becomes a different matter. I can only become myself within humanity. If I detach myself from others, I cease to exist as an individual self.
The highest virtue of Shun and the Duke of Zhou was embodied in their filial piety; their highest character was that of a filial son. But without parents, the identity of a child ceases to exist, and how could one then manifest the virtue of filial piety or complete the character of filial devotion?
Consider this: In the father-son relationship, if I am the son, what I aspire to complete is my own filial devotion as a son. I cannot insist on the completion of my father’s parental affection. The manifestation of parental affection depends on the father, not the son. If the son focuses solely on demanding the father’s affection, and the father focuses solely on demanding the son’s filial piety, then father and son become adversaries. This opposition leads to conflict and discord. How, then, can filial piety and parental affection exist amidst such discord? Moreover, a son who only seeks his father’s affection is not a filial son, and a father who only seeks his son’s piety is not an affectionate father.
If everyone constantly demands things from the other party, it only brings suffering to life. If I am the son, I should practice my filial piety wholeheartedly without questioning whether my father is affectionate. If I am the father, I should practice my parental affection wholeheartedly without questioning whether my son is filial. Logically speaking, fulfilling what depends on myself is an effortless and achievable task. Demanding fulfillment from others is a strenuous and often impossible task. Why then do people not focus their efforts on themselves, doing the effortless and possible task to complete the self, but instead insist on focusing their efforts on others, undertaking the strenuous and impossible task of demanding their fulfillment first?”
圣人之伟大，正伟大在其和别人差不多。因此人亦必做成一圣人，乃始可说一句“我亦人也”。乃始可说在人中完成了一我。这一悬义将会随着人类文化之演进而日见其真确与普遍。以上所说如何完成一我，系在德性的完成上品格的完成上说。若从事业与行为的完成上说，则又另成一说法。我必在人之中成一我，我若离了人，便不再见有我。舜与周公之最高德性之完成在其孝，舜与周公之最高品格成为一孝子。但若没有父母，即不见子的身份，更何从有孝的德性之表现，与孝的品格之完成呢？当知父子相处，若我是子，则我之所欲完成者，正欲完成我为子之孝，而并不能定要完成父之慈。父之慈，其事在父，不在子。若为子者，一心要父之慈。为父者，一心要子之孝，如是则父子成了对立，因对立而相争，而不和。试问父子不和，那里再会有孝慈？而且子只求父慈，那子便不是一孝子，父只求子孝，那父便不是一慈父。若人人尽要求对方，此只是人生一痛苦。我为子，我便不问父之慈否，先尽了我之孝。我为父，便不问子之孝否，先尽了我之慈。照常理论，尽其在我是一件省力事，可能事。求其在人，是一件吃力事，未必可能事。人为何不用心在自己身上，做省力的可能事来求完成我，而偏要用心在他人身上，做吃力的不可能事来先求完成了他呢？
“The desires of the human heart are always similar. There is no father who does not hope for his son’s filial piety, and no son who does not hope for his father’s affection. But making demands creates a barrier. Focusing solely on what lies beyond this barrier to seek fulfillment, and finding it unattainable, leads inevitably to containment as a fallback position. From containment arises law. Law is like building a defensive line encircling people.
But if we turn inward instead, each seeking fulfillment within ourselves: if a son can be filial, the father will certainly not oppose it. If a father can be affectionate, the son will certainly not oppose it. Moreover, a son’s filial piety can induce the father’s affection; a father’s affection can induce the son’s filial piety. By fulfilling first what depends on oneself, this leads not to law, but to propriety . Propriety does not aim to contain people, but to induce them.
The Chinese sages sought only to become the kind of person that all those connected to them in every direction hoped they would be, and whom they were genuinely capable of becoming. Thus, there was no need first to contain others in order to complete the self. Containing others does not necessarily complete the self; completing the self, however, eliminates the need to contain others.
Therefore, Chinese sages always advocated following proprietyrather than relying on law. Confucius said: ‘To master the self and return to propriety is to be humane Is being humane not up to the self, but up to others?’ This is the great lesson of the Chinese perspective on teaching people to complete the self.”