Byline: lunyu.ai editorial desk · Review: lunyu.ai editorial desk
The Meng Family in the Analects: Asking What Filial Conduct Requires
The Meng Family in the Analects is the Lu house that keeps asking what filial conduct requires — and whether ability is the same as ren. In the Analects they appear as 孟氏 (Meng-sun; Legge: Mang-sun): Meng Yi (孟懿子; Legge: Mang I) asks about filial piety and hears 无违; Meng Wu (孟武伯; Legge: Mang Wu) asks again and hears parents’ worry over illness; Meng Wu presses once more whether Zi Lu — and then Ran You and Gongxi Hua — is ren, and meets a hard “I do not know.” This Note is not a rewrite of the filial-conduct Note, not a rewrite of the Duke Ai or Duke Ding Notes, not a retell of the Zi Lu / Ran You / Gongxi Hua Who Notes via 5.7, and not the Ji Family Note. The index already gathers the cluster; here you deepen three passage doors.
Meng Yi asks — 无违, then 生事之以礼
Start with The Analects · Wei Chang 2.5. The source: 孟懿子问孝，子曰，无违。樊迟御，子吿之曰，孟孙问孝于我，我对曰，无违。樊迟曰，何谓也，子曰，生事之以礼，死葬之以礼，祭之以礼。
The modern guide on that page: 孟懿子问什么是孝。孔子说：不要违背礼。后来樊迟为孔子驾车，孔子告诉他说：孟孙问我孝，我回答说不要违背礼。樊迟问这是什么意思。孔子说：父母活着时，要按礼侍奉；父母去世后，要按礼安葬，按礼祭祀。
Legge on the same page: 1. Mang I asked what filial piety was. The Master said, "It is not being disobedient." 2. Soon after, as Fan Ch'ih was driving him, the Master told him, saying, "Mang-sun asked me what filial piety was, and I answered him,—'not being disobedient.'" 3. Fan Ch'ih said, "What did you mean?" The Master replied, "That parents, when alive, be served according to propriety; that, when dead, they should be buried according to propriety; and that they should be sacrificed to according to propriety."
Take the hinge carefully. Meng Yi (孟懿子) asks what filial piety is; the Master answers 无违 — not being disobedient. Only when Fan Ch'ih asks what that means does the answer open into 生事之以礼，死葬之以礼，祭之以礼 — serve, bury, and sacrifice according to propriety. You are given a Meng-named door into filial clarity held by ritual form, not a Meng biography novel, and not a rewrite of the filial-conduct Note. Open this lead door; do not expand it into that essay.
Meng Wu asks — parents’ worry over illness
Open The Analects · Wei Chang 2.6. The source: 孟武伯问孝，子曰，父母唯其疾之忧。
The guide: 孟武伯问什么是孝。孔子说：做子女的，最该让父母只为自己的疾病担忧，而不为其他过失担忧。
Legge: Mang Wu asked what filial piety was. The Master said, "Parents are anxious lest their children should be sick."
Read the edge only. Meng Wu (孟武伯) asks the same family question — what filial piety is — and hears 父母唯其疾之忧: parents are anxious lest their children should be sick. The guide on that page presses the hinge further: let parents worry only over illness, not over other faults. This Note opens one Meng door into that measured worry. It does not retell the filial-conduct Note.
Meng Wu presses ren — ability is not the same as ren
In The Analects · Kung-ye Ch'ang 5.7 Meng Wu presses another question. The source: 孟武伯问子路仁乎。子曰，不知也。又问。子曰，由也，千乘之国，可使治其赋也，不知其仁也。求也何如。子曰，求也，千室之邑，百乘之家，可使为之宰也，不知其仁也。赤也何如。子曰，赤也，束带立于朝，可使与宾客言也，不知其仁也。
The guide: 孟武伯问：子路做到仁了吗？孔子说：不知道。孟武伯又问。孔子说：仲由嘛，一个拥有千辆兵车的大国，可以让他去管理军政，至于他是不是仁，我就不知道了。孟武伯问：冉求怎么样？孔子说：冉求嘛，一个千户人家的大邑、拥有百辆兵车的大夫封地，可以让他去做总管，至于他是不是仁，我就不知道了。孟武伯又问：公西赤怎么样？孔子说：公西赤嘛，让他穿戴整齐，束好衣带，站在朝廷上，可以让他去接待宾客办理交涉，至于他是不是仁，我就不知道了。
Legge: 1. Mang Wu asked about Tsze-lu, whether he was perfectly virtuous. The Master said, "I do not know." 2. He asked again, when the Master replied, "In a kingdom of a thousand chariots, Yu might be employed to manage the military levies, but I do not know whether he be perfectly virtuous." 3. "And what do you say of Ch'iu?" The Master replied, "In a city of a thousand families, or a clan of a hundred chariots, Ch'iu might be employed as governor, but I do not know whether he is perfectly virtuous." 4. "What do you say of Ch'ih?" The Master replied, "With his sash girt and standing in a court, Ch'ih might be employed to converse with the visitors and guests, but I do not know whether he is perfectly virtuous."
You get one door into ren withheld. Meng Wu asks whether Zi Lu is ren; the Master first says he does not know, then grants ability — military levies, governorship, guest converse — and still answers 不知其仁也. Stay on the Meng asker’s hinge: ability is named, ren is not lightly granted. Do not rewrite the Zi Lu, Ran You, or Gongxi Hua Who Notes through this door.
What the three doors add up to
Put them together and you have: Meng Yi hearing 无违 opened into serving, burying, and sacrificing according to propriety (2.5); Meng Wu hearing parents’ worry limited to illness (2.6); and Meng Wu again pressing whether capable ministers are ren, and meeting 不知其仁也 (5.7). The Note deepens those doors; it does not retell the index line that already calls the house a Lu aristocratic family appearing in questions on filial conduct, ritual, and politics.
This is also not a rewrite of the filial-conduct Note (2.5 and 2.6 are Meng doors here, not a filial essay), not a rewrite of the Duke Ai or Duke Ding Notes, not a rewrite of the Zi Lu / Ran You / Gongxi Hua Who Notes via 5.7, and not today’s Ji Family Note. False friends — inventing a three-houses-of-Lu survey, stacking keywords around Meng Yi / Mang I / Meng Wu / Mang Wu, or turning 5.7 into disciple biographies — are not this Note’s work.
As your own reflection — not as Confucius’s words — you may want a soft yes when ability is already clear. The Analects can place the Meng house at the filial question and still open 无违 into ritual form; it can name parents’ worry over illness without promising a longer filial treatise; and it can let Meng Wu press ren three times and still answer that he does not know. The harder edge in these doors is filial clarity held by propriety — and a hard “I do not know” when ren is claimed too soon.
FAQ
Who is the Meng Family in the Analects?
They are a Lu aristocratic house (孟氏; Meng-sun; Legge: Mang-sun). Live passages show Meng Yi (孟懿子; Mang I) asking about filial piety (2.5), Meng Wu (孟武伯; Mang Wu) asking again (2.6), and Meng Wu pressing whether Zi Lu — then Ran You and Gongxi Hua — is ren (5.7). Check each quote on its passage page and say whether you used the source, the guide, or Legge.
What does 无违 mean in 2.5?
Meng Yi asks what filial piety is; the Master answers 无违 — Legge: "It is not being disobedient." When Fan Ch'ih asks what that means, the answer opens into serving, burying, and sacrificing according to propriety. This Note reads that as filial clarity held by ritual form; it does not rewrite the filial-conduct Note.
What is the edge in 2.6?
父母唯其疾之忧 — Legge: "Parents are anxious lest their children should be sick." The guide on that page adds: let parents worry only over illness, not over other faults. One Meng door into measured worry; not a filial monograph.
Why does 5.7 withhold ren?
Meng Wu asks whether Zi Lu is ren; the Master says he does not know, then names real ability for Yu, Ch'iu, and Ch'ih, and still answers 不知其仁也. Ability is not treated as the same as ren. Stay on that hinge; do not retell the Zi Lu, Ran You, or Gongxi Hua Who Notes.
Is this the same as the Ji Family Note?
No. The Meng Family index and the Ji Family index are neighboring Lu houses; this Note only opens the three Meng doors on the live Meng Family index. It is not a three-houses survey and not today’s Ji Family Note.
After FAQ — open the Meng Family index
When you want the passages that name this house gathered on one screen, open Meng Family. The index marks a Lu aristocratic family appearing in questions on filial conduct, ritual, and politics and selects doors; this Note followed Meng Yi on 无违, Meng Wu on parents’ worry over illness, and Meng Wu again on ren withheld. Read the doors again there in context, and when you quote any of them, give the passage URL and say whether you used the source, the guide, or Legge.