Therefore I have tried to show that from the time of the Three Dynasties it has always been the external which has changed the nature of man. If a mean man, he will die for gain. If a superior man, he will die for fame. If a man of rank, he will die for his ancestral honours. If a Sage, he will die for the world. The pursuits and ambitions of these men differ, but the injury to their natures involved in the sacrifice of their lives is the same. Tsang and Ku were shepherds, both of whom lost their flocks. On inquiry, it appeared that Tsang had been engaged in reading, while Ku had gone to take part in some trials of strength. Their occupations had been different, but the result was in each case loss of the sheep. Poh I died for fame at the foot of Mount Shou-yang. See ch. vi. Robber Chê died for gain on Mount T'ai. Robber Chê has a chapter to himself, from which, though spurious, it may be gathered that he was a very remarkable personage in his day. Mount T'ai has been mentioned in ch. i. Their deaths were not the same, but the injury to their lives and natures was in each case the same. How then can we applaud the former and blame the latter? And so, if a man dies for charity and duty to his neighbour the world calls him a noble fellow; but if he dies for gain, the world calls him a low fellow. The dying being the same, one is nevertheless called noble and the other low. But in point of injury to life and nature, the robber Chê and Poh I are one. Where then does the distinction of noble and low come in? Were a man to apply himself to charity and duty towards his neighbour until he were the equal of Tsêng or Shih, this would not be what I mean by perfection. Or to flavours, until he were the equal of Yü Erh. Probably identical with I Ya, the Soyer of China. Or to sounds, until he were the equal of Shih K'uang. Or to colours, until he were the equal of Li Chu. What I mean by perfection is not what is meant by charity and duty to one's neighbour. It is found in the cultivation of TAO. And those whom I regard as cultivators of TAO are not those who cultivate charity and duty to one's neighbour. They are those who yield to the natural conditions of things. What I call perfection of hearing is not hearing others but oneself. What I call perfection of vision is not seeing others but oneself. A saying attributed by Han Fei Tzŭ to Lao Tzŭ:--"To see oneself is to be clear of sight." See _The Remains of Lao Tzŭ_, p. 18. For a man who sees not himself but others, takes not possession of himself but of others, thus taking what others should take and not what he himself should take. Multi sunt, qui urbes, qui populos habuere in potestate, paucissimi, qui se. Instead of being himself, he in fact becomes some one else. And if a man thus becomes some one else instead of himself, this is a fatal error of which both the robber Chê and Poh I can be equally guilty.