Or,' What's it like to repay evil with good?' Confucius said,' How can I repay you? Deal with complaints directly and repay kindness with kindness.
(Someone asked Confucius: Is the person who can repay kindness with kindness awesome? Confucius asked: Do you have anything in return for being kind to you? Based on this, we can draw our own conclusion that normal people should report complaints directly and return good for evil. )
So this case is a bit like think twice before you leap. Wen Zi said, "Again, it doesn't matter." ), was later criticized by Kong Old Master Q to correct the wrong idea, and the result became his old man's own famous saying.
However, we can take a closer look at good for evil. This is not what Confucius said, but what someone said (or said). So who is this person?
It is difficult for us to verify the person who specifically asked Confucius, perhaps a student, an admirer or an opponent, but this person asked this question, and it was not groundless.
Doing nothing, doing nothing, is tasteless. Good for evil, big or small. The chart is easier and more difficult than it, because it is more detailed than it; It is easy to do difficult things in the world, and it is necessary to do great things in the world. Therefore, a saint is not great after all, so he can become great.
It is easy and difficult for a husband who promises lightly to break his promise. It is difficult to be a saint, so there is no difficulty in the end.
-Chapter 63 of the Tao Te Ching
Good for evil, change the word order, the meaning remains the same. So we found that, although good for evil is only a criticized wrong view in The Analects of Confucius, it has such a high origin as the Tao Te Ching. Don't forget the legend that even Confucius asked Lao Tzu. )
It's not surprising that Lao Tzu would say such a thing. Similar syntax can be found everywhere in Tao Te Ching. Laozi himself said that this is called contradiction. For example, if a song is complete, if it is wasted, it will be straight, if it is hollow, we will be new, if Ming Dow is ignorant, if he is shrinking, if he is arrogant, if he is clumsy, if he is arguing, then according to Laozi's dialectics, he demands that the small is the big, the little is the big, and the good is the bad (the big and the big are mostly conative).
So, can good for evil be verified in other places in the Tao Te Ching? I think it is similar to Chapter 49. Good, bad and bad are all good virtues. I believe those who believe, and I believe those who don't. I believe in virtue. I (sage or ruler) will be kind to people who are kind or unkind, so that everyone can be kind; No matter who is trustworthy, I will trust, so that everyone is trustworthy. However, goodness and faith here are not aimed at personal virtue or resentment.
According to Laozi's overall thought, we have every reason to believe that he is more in favor of returning good for evil than returning good for evil, let alone returning good for evil.
The conclusion of this part is that we mistakenly added Laozi's words to Confucius. The views of Confucianism and Taoism are no longer consistent. One said good for evil, and the other said straight for evil, all in line with their consistent views.
But in fact, this problem can be further deepened.
Looking back at Chapter 63 of the Tao Te Ching quoted above, do you feel a little strange? What is discussed below is the difficulty of the matter, the big points and details, but the words "good for evil" are inserted in it, which seems to have nothing to do with the context.
So someone suggested that this is actually a problem caused by mistakes. These four words are not found in Chapter 63. Then where is it? Textual research is most likely in chapter seventy-nine:
If you have a big complaint, you will have a remaining complaint. Can you think it's good?
He is a saint who holds a left deed and does not blame others. There are German companies, but there are no German companies.
Heaven has no relatives, but often with good people.
So it should be:
There are great grievances, and there are residual grievances. If you return good for evil, do you think it is good?
He is a saint who holds a left deed and does not blame others. There are German companies, but there are no German companies.
Heaven has no relatives, but often with good people.
As long as there have been grievances, even if good for evil and reconciliation are successful, there will be residual acne in others' hearts. How can this be regarded as a proper way?
Therefore, the best way is not to make enemies at the root. A virtuous man holds an iou (deed of house) without collecting debts. Virtuous people, such as tax collectors, haggle over every ounce and force others.
God has no preference and will always be with good people.