literally “human-qing,” which can be properly rendered with “responsive relations of trust,” “gratitude or favor for acquaintances,” “obligations and personal relations,” where the affective dimension is prevalently perceived in its social dimension, with reciprocal obligations and bounds. Thus renqing concerns not only human personal emotions but also social ties and behavioral interaction. When emotions and passions are mentioned in the volume, they are often used as equivalent of the polysemantic term qing. The basic meanings of this term range from “feeling or affective state of mind” and “inclination or affection or desire,” like in the case of “seven passions” (qiqing 七情). However, the multiplicity of meanings of qing, from “natural and genuine” to “situation,” “circumstances” or to “love,” “desire,” and so forth, makes this term very ambiguous and difficult to translate. In certain cases, therefore, the Chinese term with its ambiguous and rich association of meanings has been maintained. In other cases, qing should be rendered with “love,” even if the meaning cannot be identically equivalent. See L. S. Yang. “Concept of Pao as a Basis for Social Relations in China,” 291–309; Yang Liansheng, Zhongguo wenhua zhong bāo, băo, bào zhi yiyi; and Jin Yaoji, “Renji Guanxi zhong Renqing zhi Fenxi,” 75–104. Cf. renqing with various meanings, which focus on social harmony and a variety of legal situations, or on personal emotions and desires.

6. Lunyu 論語, Yang Huo 陽貨, 2.

7. Cf. Solomon, “Recapturing Personal Identity.” One of the best studies on the ideal personality in traditional China is Rujia Lixiang Renge yu Zhongguo Wenhua by Zhu Yilu.

8. There are no doubts on the “contemporaneity” of the previous discussions: tensions between the ideas of freedom and determinism, or between the individual with their inner tendencies and external social organizations, are not necessarily the predominant themes of debate in a culture in the past; even in the present, such questions are among many other concerns and worries. This does not mean that such problems were ignored in Imperial China. In any case, the sensibilities of writers in traditional China were not the same as those of modern scholars and readers. Thus, as much as possible, the translation and explanation of terms require the observance of coherence with the original system of ideas accepted by the author. Any caveat on misinterpretation and misapprehension due to apparent similarities and the surfaces of a phenomena is worthy of consideration not only for comparative attempts but also for any historical enquiry where the researcher does not share the social-intellectual