The famous Han Yu, to be mentioned again
shortly, was a pillar and prop of Confucianism. He flourished between
A.D. 768 and 824, and performed such lasting services in what was to
him the cause of truth, that his tablet has been placed in the Confucian
temple, an honour reserved only for those whose orthodoxy is beyond
suspicion. Yet he ventured upon an attempt to modify this important
dogma, taking care all the time to appear as if he were criticizing
Mencius rather than Confucius, on whom, of course, the real
responsibility rests. He declared, solely upon his own authority, that
the nature of man is not uniform but divided into three grades--namely,
highest, middle, and lowest. Thus, natures of the highest grade are
good, wholly good, and nothing but good; natures of the lowest grade
are evil, wholly evil, and nothing but evil; while natures of the middle
grade may, under right direction, rise to the highest grade, or, under
wrong direction, sink to the lowest.

Another question, much debated in the age of Mencius, arose out of the
rival statements of two almost contemporary philosophers, Mo Ti (_Maw
Tee_) and Yang Chu. The former taught a system of mutual and consequently
universal love as a cure for all the ills arising from misgovernment
and want of social harmony. He pointed out, with much truth, that if the
feudal states would leave one another alone, families cease to quarrel,
and thieves cease to steal, while sovereign and subject lived on terms
of benevolence and loyalty, and fathers and sons on terms of kindness
and filial piety--then indeed the empire would be well governed. But
beyond suggesting the influence of teachers in the prohibition of hatred
and the encouragement of mutual love, our philosopher does little or
nothing to aid us in reaching such a desirable consummation.

The doctrine of Yang Chu is summed up as "every man for himself," and is
therefore diametrically opposed to that of Mo Ti. A questioner one day
asked him if he would consent to part with a single hair in order to
benefit the whole world. Yang Chu replied that a single hair could be
of no possible benefit to the world; and on being further pressed to
say what he would do if a hair were really of such benefit, it is stated
that he gave no answer. On the strength of this story, Mencius said:
"Yang's principle was, every man for himself. Though by plucking out a
single hair he might have benefited the whole world, he would not have
done