History

Creation of the text

According to Ban Gu, writing in the Book of Han, the Analects originated as individual records kept by Confucius's disciples of conversations between the Master and them, which were then collected and jointly edited by the disciples after Confucius's death in 479 BC. The work is therefore titled Lunyu meaning "edited conversations" or "selected speeches" (i.e. analects). This broadly forms the traditional account of the genesis of the work accepted by later generations of scholars, for example the Song dynasty neo-Confucian scholar Zhu Xi stated that Analects is the records of Confucius's first- and second-generation pupils.

This traditional view has been challenged by Chinese, Japanese, and Western scholars. The Qing dynasty philologist Cui Shu argued on linguistic ground that the last five books were produced much later than the rest of the work. Itō Jinsai claimed that, because of differences he saw in patterns of language and content in the Analects, a distinction in authorship should be made between the "upper Analects" (Books 1–10) and "lower Analects" (Books 11–20). Arthur Waley speculated that Books 3–9 represent the earliest parts of the book. E. Bruce Brooks and A. Taeko Brooks reviewed previous theories of the chapters' creation and produced a "four stratum theory" of the text's creation. Many modern scholars now believe that the work was compiled over a period of around two hundred years, some time during the Warring States period (476–221 BC), with some questioning the authenticity of some of the sayings. Because no texts dated earlier than about 50 BC have been discovered, and because the Analects was not referred to by name in any existing source before the early Han dynasty, some scholars have proposed dates as late as 140 BC for the text's compilation.

Regardless of how early the text of the Analects existed, most Analects scholars believe that by the early Han dynasty (206 BC–220 AD) the book was widely known and transmitted throughout China in a mostly complete form, and that the book acquired its final, complete form during the Han dynasty. However, Han dynasty writer Wang Chong claimed that all copies of the Analects that existed during the Han dynasty were incomplete and formed only a part of a much larger work. This is supported by the fact that a larger collection of Confucius's teachings did exist in the Warring States period than has been preserved directly in the Analects: 75% of Confucius's sayings cited by his second-generation student, Mencius, do not exist in the received text of the Analects.

Versions

According to the Han dynasty scholar Liu Xiang, there were two versions of the Analects that existed at the beginning of the Han dynasty: the "Lu version" and the "Qi version". The Lu version contained twenty chapters, and the Qi version contained twenty-two chapters, including two chapters not found in the Lu version. Of the twenty chapters that both versions had in common, the Lu version had more passages. Each version had its own masters, schools, and transmitters.

In the reign of Emperor Jing of Han (r. 157–141 BC), a third version (the "Old Text" version) was discovered hidden in a wall of the home then believed to be Confucius's when the home was in the process of being destroyed by King Gong of Lu (r. 153–128 BC) in order to expand the king's palace. The new version did not contain the two extra chapters found in the Qi version, but it split one chapter found in the Lu and Qi versions in two, so it had twenty-one chapters, and the order of the chapters was different.

The old text version got its name because it was written in characters not used since the earlier Warring States period (i.e. before 221 BC), when it was assumed to have been hidden. According to the Han dynasty scholar Huan Tan, the old text version had four hundred characters different from the Lu version (from which the received text of the Analects is mostly based), and it seriously differed from the Lu version in twenty-seven places. Of these twenty-seven differences, the received text only agrees with the old text version in two places.

Over a century later, the tutor of the Analects to Emperor Cheng of Han, Zhang Yu (d. 5 BC), synthesized the Lu and Qi versions by taking the Lu version as authoritative and selectively adding sections from the Qi version, and produced a composite text of the Analects known as the "Zhang Hou Lun". This text was recognized by Zhang Yu's contemporaries and by subsequent Han scholars as superior to either individual version, and is the text that is recognized as the Analects today. The Qi version was lost for about 1800 years but re-found during the excavation of the tomb of Marquis of Haihun in 2011. No complete copies of either the Lu version or the old text version of the Analects exist today, though fragments of the old text version were discovered at Dunhuang.

Before the late twentieth century the oldest existing copy of the Analects known to scholars was found in the "Stone Classics of the Xinping Era", a copy of the Confucian classics written in stone in the old Eastern Han dynasty capital of Luoyang around 175 AD. Archaeologists have since discovered two handwritten copies of the Analects that were written around 50 BC, during the Western Han dynasty. They are known as the "Dingzhou Analects", and the "Pyongyang Analects", after the location of the tombs in which they were found. The Dingzhou Analects was discovered in 1973, but no transcription of its contents was published until 1997. The Pyongyang Analects was discovered in 1992. Academic access to the Pyongyang Analects has been highly restricted, and no academic study on it was published until 2009.

The Dingzhou Analects was damaged in a fire shortly after it was entombed in the Han dynasty. It was further damaged in an earthquake shortly after it was recovered, and the surviving text is just under half the size of the received text of the Analects. Of the sections that survive, the Dingzhou Analects is shorter than the received Analects, implying that the text of the Analects was still in the process of expansion when the Dingzhou Analects was entombed. There was evidence that "additions" may have been made to the manuscript after it had been completed, indicating that the writer may have become aware of at least one other version of the Analects and included "extra" material for the sake of completeness.

The content of the Pyongyang Analects is similar to the Dingzhou Analects. Because of the secrecy and isolationism of the North Korean government, only a very cursory study of it has been made available to international scholars, and its contents are not completely known outside of North Korea. Scholars do not agree about whether either the Dingzhou Analects or the Pyongyang Analects represent the Lu version, the Qi version, the old text version, or a different version that was independent of these three traditions.

Importance within Confucianism

During most of the Han period the Analects was not considered one of the principal texts of Confucianism. During the reign of Han Wudi (141–87 BC), when the Chinese government began promoting Confucian studies, only the Five Classics were considered by the government to be canonical (jing). They were considered Confucian because Confucius was assumed to have partially written, edited, and/or transmitted them. The Analects was considered secondary as it was thought to be merely a collection of Confucius's oral "commentary" (zhuan) on the Five Classics.

The political importance and popularity of Confucius and Confucianism grew throughout the Han dynasty, and by the Eastern Han the Analects was widely read by schoolchildren and anyone aspiring to literacy, and often read before the Five Classics themselves. During the Eastern Han, the heir apparent was provided a tutor specifically to teach him the Analects. The growing importance of the Analects was recognized when the Five Classics was expanded to the "Seven Classics": the Five Classics plus the Analects and the Classic of Filial Piety, and its status as one of the central texts of Confucianism continued to grow until the late Song dynasty (960–1279), when it was identified and promoted as one of the Four Books by Zhu Xi and generally accepted as being more insightful than the older Five Classics.

The writing style of the Analects also inspired future Confucian writers. For example, Sui Dynasty writer Wang Tong's 中说 (Explanation of the Mean) was purposely written to emulate the style of the Analects, a practice praised by Ming Dynasty philosopher Wang Yangming.

Commentaries

Since the Han dynasty, Chinese readers have interpreted the Analects by reading scholars' commentaries on the book. There have been many commentaries on the Analects since the Han dynasty, but the two which have been most influential have been the Collected Explanations of the Analects (Lunyu Jijie) by He Yan (c. 195–249) and several colleagues, and the Collected Commentaries of the Analects (Lunyu Jizhu) by Zhu Xi (1130–1200). In his work, He Yan collected, selected, summarized, and rationalized what he believed to be the most insightful of all preceding commentaries on the Analects which had been produced by earlier Han and Wei dynasty (220–265 AD) scholars.

He Yan's personal interpretation of the Lunyu was guided by his belief that Daoism and Confucianism complemented each other, so that by studying both in a correct manner a scholar could arrive at a single, unified truth. Arguing for the ultimate compatibility of Daoist and Confucian teachings, he argued that "Laozi fact was in agreement with the Sage" (sic). The Explanations was written in 248 AD, was quickly recognized as authoritative, and remained the standard guide to interpreting the Analects for nearly 1,000 years, until the early Yuan dynasty (1271–1368). It is the oldest complete commentary on the Analects that still exists.

He Yan's commentary was eventually displaced as the definitive, standard commentary by Zhu Xi's commentary. Zhu Xi's work also brought together the commentaries of earlier scholars (mostly from the Song dynasty), along with his own interpretations. Zhu's work took part in the context of a period of renewed interest in Confucian studies, in which Chinese scholars were interested in producing a single "correct" intellectual orthodoxy that would "save" Chinese traditions and protect them from foreign influences, and in which scholars were increasingly interested in metaphysical speculation.

In his commentary Zhu made a great effort to interpret the Analects by using theories elaborated in the other Four Books, something that He Yan had not done. Zhu attempted to give an added coherence and unity to the message of the Analects, demonstrating that the individual books of the Confucian canon gave meaning to the whole, just as the whole of the canon gave meaning to its parts. In his preface, Zhu Xi stated, "The Analects and the Mencius are the most important works for students pursuing the Way ... The words of the Analects are all inclusive; what they teach is nothing but the essentials of preserving the mind and cultivating one's nature."

From the first publication of the Commentaries, Zhu continued to refine his interpretation for the last thirty years of his life. In the fourteenth century, the Chinese government endorsed Zhu's commentary. Until 1905 it was read and memorized along with the Analects by all Chinese aspiring to literacy and employment as government officials.

Contents

Very few reliable sources about Confucius exist besides that of the Analects. The principal biography available to historians is included in Sima Qian's Shiji, but because the Shiji contains a large amount of (possibly legendary) material not confirmed by extant sources, the biographical material on Confucius found in the Analects makes the Analects arguably the most reliable source of biographical information about Confucius. Confucius viewed himself as a "transmitter" of social and political traditions originating in the early Zhou dynasty (c. 1000–800 BC), and claimed not to have originated anything (Analects 7.1), but Confucius's social and political ideals were not popular in his time.

Social philosophy

Confucius' discussions on the nature of the supernatural (Analects 3.12; 6.20; 11.11) indicate his belief that while "ghosts" and "spirits" should be respected, they are best kept at a distance. Instead human beings should base their values and social ideals on moral philosophy, tradition, and a natural love for others. Confucius' social philosophy largely depended on the cultivation of ren by every individual in a community.

Later Confucian philosophers explained ren as the quality of having a kind manner, similar to the English words "humane", "altruistic", or "benevolent", but, of the sixty instances in which Confucius discusses ren in the Analects, very few have these later meanings. Confucius instead used the term ren to describe an extremely general and all-encompassing state of virtue, one which no living person had attained completely. (This use of the term ren is peculiar to the Analects.)

Throughout the Analects, Confucius's students frequently request that Confucius define ren and give examples of people who embody it, but Confucius generally responds indirectly to his students' questions, instead offering illustrations and examples of behaviours that are associated with ren and explaining how a person could achieve it. According to Confucius, a person with a well-cultivated sense of ren would speak carefully and modestly (Analects 12.3); be resolute and firm (Analects 12.20), courageous (Analects 14.4), free from worry, unhappiness, and insecurity (Analects 9.28; 6.21); moderate their desires and return to propriety (Analects 12.1); be respectful, tolerant, diligent, trustworthy and kind (Analects 17.6); and love others (Analects 12.22). Confucius recognized his followers' disappointment that he would not give them a more comprehensive definition of ren, but assured them that he was sharing all that he could (Analects 7.24).

To Confucius, the cultivation of ren involved depreciating oneself through modesty while avoiding artful speech and ingratiating manners that would create a false impression of one's own character (Analects 1.3). Confucius said that those who had cultivated ren could be distinguished by their being "simple in manner and slow of speech." He believed that people could cultivate their sense of ren through exercising the inverted Golden Rule: "Do not do to others what you would not like done to yourself"; "a man with ren, desiring to establish himself, helps others establish themselves; desiring to succeed himself, helps others to succeed" (Analects 12.2; 6.28).

Confucius taught that the ability of people to imagine and project themselves into the places of others was a crucial quality for the pursuit of moral self-cultivation (Analects 4.15; see also 5.12; 6.30; 15.24). Confucius regarded the exercise of devotion to one's parents and older siblings as the simplest, most basic way to cultivate ren. (Analects 1.2).

Confucius believed that ren could best be cultivated by those who had already learned self-discipline, and that self-discipline was best learned by practicing and cultivating one's understanding of li: rituals and forms of propriety through which people demonstrate their respect for others and their responsible roles in society (Analects 3.3). Confucius said that one's understanding of li should inform everything that one says and does (Analects 12.1). He believed that subjecting oneself to li did not mean suppressing one's desires, but learning to reconcile them with the needs of one's family and broader community.

By leading individuals to express their desires within the context of social responsibility, Confucius and his followers taught that the public cultivation of li was the basis of a well-ordered society (Analects 2.3). Confucius taught his students that an important aspect of li was observing the practical social differences that exist between people in daily life. In Confucian philosophy these "five relationships" include: ruler to ruled; father to son; husband to wife; elder brother to younger brother; and friend to friend.

Ren and li have a special relationship in the Analects: li manages one's relationship with one's family and close community, while ren is practiced broadly and informs one's interactions with all people. Confucius did not believe that ethical self-cultivation meant unquestioned loyalty to an evil ruler. He argued that the demands of ren and li meant that rulers could oppress their subjects only at their own peril: "You may rob the Three Armies of their commander, but you cannot deprive the humblest peasant of his opinion" (Analects 9.26). Confucius said that a morally well-cultivated individual would regard his devotion to loving others as a mission for which he would be willing to die (Analects 15.8).

Political philosophy

Confucius' political beliefs were rooted in his belief that a good ruler would be self-disciplined, would govern his subjects through education and by his own example, and would seek to correct his subjects with love and concern rather than punishment and coercion. "If the people be led by laws, and uniformity among them be sought by punishments, they will try to escape punishment and have no sense of shame. If they are led by virtue, and uniformity sought among them through the practice of ritual propriety, they will possess a sense of shame and come to you of their own accord" (Analects 2.3; see also 13.6). Confucius' political theories were directly contradictory to the Legalistic political orientations of China's rulers, and he failed to popularize his ideals among China's leaders within his own lifetime.

Confucius believed that the social chaos of his time was largely due to China's ruling elite aspiring to, and claiming, titles of which they were unworthy. When the ruler of the large state of Qi asked Confucius about the principles of good government, Confucius responded: "Good government consists in the ruler being a ruler, the minister being a minister, the father being a father, and the son being a son" (Analects 12.11).

The analysis of the need to raise officials' behavior to reflect the way that they identify and describe themselves is known as the rectification of names, and he stated that the rectification of names should be the first responsibility of a ruler upon taking office (Analects 13.3). Confucius believed that, because the ruler was the model for all who were under him in society, the rectification of names had to begin with the ruler, and that afterwards others would change to imitate him (Analects 12.19).

Confucius judged a good ruler by his possession of de ("virtue"): a sort of moral force that allows those in power to rule and gain the loyalty of others without the need for physical coercion (Analects 2.1). Confucius said that one of the most important ways that a ruler cultivates his sense of de is through a devotion to the correct practices of li. Examples of rituals identified by Confucius as important to cultivate a ruler's de include: sacrificial rites held at ancestral temples to express thankfulness and humility; ceremonies of enfeoffment, toasting, and gift exchanges that bound nobility in complex hierarchical relationships of obligation and indebtedness; and, acts of formal politeness and decorum (i.e. bowing and yielding) that identify the performers as morally well-cultivated.

Education

The importance of education and study is a fundamental theme of the Analects. For Confucius, a good student respects and learns from the words and deeds of his teacher, and a good teacher is someone older who is familiar with the ways of the past and the practices of antiquity (Analects 7.22). Confucius emphasized the need to find balance between formal study and intuitive self-reflection (Analects 2.15). When teaching he is never cited in the Analects as lecturing at length about any subject, but instead challenges his students to discover the truth through asking direct questions, citing passages from the classics, and using analogies (Analects 7.8). He sometimes required his students to demonstrate their understanding of subjects by making intuitive conceptual leaps before accepting their understanding and discussing those subjects at greater levels of depth. (Analects 3.8)

His primary goal in educating his students was to produce ethically well-cultivated men who would carry themselves with gravity, speak correctly, and demonstrate consummate integrity in all things (Analects 12.11; see also 13.3). He was willing to teach anyone regardless of social class, as long as they were sincere, eager, and tireless to learn (Analects 7.7; 15.38). He is traditionally credited with teaching three thousand students, though only seventy are said to have mastered what he taught. He taught practical skills, but regarded moral self-cultivation as his most important subject.

Chapters

The traditional titles given to each chapter are mostly an initial two or three incipits. In some cases a title may indicate a central theme of a chapter, but it is inappropriate to regard a title as a description or generalization of the content of a chapter. Chapters in the Analects are grouped by individual themes, but the chapters are not arranged in a way as to carry a continuous stream of thoughts or ideas. The themes of adjacent chapters are completely unrelated to each other. Central themes recur repeatedly in different chapters, sometimes in exactly the same wording and sometimes with small variations.

Chapter 10 contains detailed descriptions of Confucius's behaviors in various daily activities. Voltaire and Ezra Pound believed that this chapter demonstrated how Confucius was a mere human. Simon Leys, who recently translated the Analects into English and French, said that the book may have been the first in human history to describe the life of an individual, historic personage. Elias Canetti wrote: "Confucius's Analects is the oldest complete intellectual and spiritual portrait of a man. It strikes one as a modern book; everything it contains and indeed everything it lacks is important."

Chapter 20, "Yao Yue", particularly the first verse, is bizarre in terms of both language and content. In terms of language, the text appears to be archaic (or a deliberate imitation of the archaic language of the Western Zhou) and bears some similarity with the language of the speeches in the Shujing. In terms of the content, the passage appears to be an admonition by Yao to Shun on the eve of Yao's abdication, which seems to be only tangentially related to Confucius and his philosophy. Moreover, there appear to be some problems with the text's continuity, and scholars have speculated that parts of the text were lost in the process of transmission and possibly transmitted with errors in the order. The fragmentary nature of the final chapter of the received Lu text has been explained by the "accretion theory", in which the text of the Analects was gradually accreted over a 230-year period, beginning with the death of Confucius and ending suddenly with the conquest of Lu in 249 BCE.

Within these incipits a large number of passages in the Analects begin with the formulaic ziyue, "The Master said," but without punctuation marks in classical Chinese, this does not confirm whether what follows ziyue is direct quotation of actual sayings of Confucius, or simply to be understood as "the Master said that.." and the paraphrase of Confucius by the compilers of the Analects.

Notable translations

• Revised second edition (1893), Oxford: Clarendon Press, reprinted by Cosimo in 2006.

•

• ; rpt. London: Oxford University Press (1937).

•

• Rpt. (2000), New York: Alfred A. Knopf.

• Yoshikawa, Kōjirō 吉川幸次郎 (1978). Rongo 论语 Lunyu, 3 vols. Tokyo: Asahi Shinbun. Rpt. 2 vols, Asahi Shinbun (1996).

• ; rpt. with Chinese text, Hong Kong: Chinese University Press (1979).

•

• English version published as Simon Leys, trans. (1997), The Analects of Confucius (New York: W. W. Norton).

•

•

•

•

•

•

流传

《论语》自战国前期成书问世，因秦始皇下令「焚书」几近湮灭不传。到西汉初年废焚书令，朝廷明令「大收篇籍，广开献书之路」，号召百姓献书。鲁人和齐人各有师资传习，形成不同的《论语》「师法」。鲁人传授〈鲁论〉20篇；齐人传授〈齐论〉22篇，多「问王」、「知道」二篇；另有鲁恭王毁坏孔子旧宅发现〈古论〉21篇，从尧曰篇「子张问何如可以从政」起分立出「从政」篇。

西汉末，汉成帝帝师张禹先后学鲁、齐论语，合二学为一，篇题以〈鲁论〉二十篇为准，去「问王」、「知道」二篇，号《张侯论》；西元二世纪中期东汉末年，郑玄以张侯论为底本，参考〈齐论〉、〈古论〉，作《论语注》，定下《论语》今本，〈齐论〉、〈古论〉不久亡佚。不到百年后，三国时期何晏把郑玄本及其反对派的观点编成了《论语集解》。南北朝时代，皇侃受佛教的影响，编成《论语义疏》。宋代理学兴起后，南宋朱熹的《论语集注》成为《论语》义理阐释的典范。

今本据阮元校勘《十三经注疏》本统计，约1万2千字。

2016年中国考古学家宣布于江西省南昌市西汉海昏侯墓内出土文物中发现〈齐论〉竹简，其中包括以「智道」（即「知道」）为题的篇章。

结构

现存的《论语》共20篇，508则

。每篇篇名取自正文开头，或「子曰」、「子谓」后首句的前二、三字，与篇目中的内容无关。按照习惯，通常把前10篇称为「上论」，后10篇称为「下论」。《论语》以〈学而〉为首。

• 学而第一（主要讲「务本」的道理，引导初学者进入「道德之门」）

• 为政第二（主要讲治理国家的道理和方法）

• 八佾第三（主要记录孔子谈论礼乐）

• 里仁第四（主要讲仁德的道理）

• 公冶长第五（主要讲评价古今人物及其得失）

• 雍也第六（记录孔子和弟子们的言行）

• 述而第七（主要记录孔子的容貌和言行）

• 泰伯第八（主要记孔子和曾子的言论及其对古人的评论）

• 子罕第九（主要记孔子言论，重点为孔子的行事风格，提倡和不提倡做的事）

• 乡党第十（主要记录孔子言谈举止，衣食住行和生活习惯）

• 先进第十一（主要记录孔子教育言论和对其弟子的评论）

• 颜渊第十二（主要讲孔子教育弟子如何实行仁德，如何为政和处世）

• 子路第十三（主要记录孔子论述为人和为政的道理）

• 宪问第十四（主要记录孔子和其弟子论修身为人之道，以及对古人的评价）

• 卫灵公第十五（主要记录孔子及其弟子在周游列国时的关于仁德治国方面的言论）

• 季氏第十六（主要记孔子论君子修身，以及如何用礼法治国）

• 阳货第十七（主要记录孔子论述仁德，阐发礼乐治国之道）

• 微子第十八（主要记录古代圣贤事迹，以及孔子众人周游列国中的言行，也记录了周游途中世人对于乱世的看法）

• 子张第十九（主要记录孔子和弟子们探讨求学为道的言论，弟子们对于孔子的敬仰赞颂）

• 尧曰第二十（本篇较为短小，疑有错漏。主要记录古代圣贤的言论和孔子对于为政的论述）

《齐论》篇章

• 知道第二十一

• 问王第二十二

惯用语

俗语

• 岁寒，然后知松柏之后凋也

• 小不忍则乱大谋

• 道不同不相为谋

• 任重而道远

• 三军可夺帅也，匹夫不可夺志也

• 朽木不可雕也

• 三人行，必有我师焉

• 谋略于方寸之间，决战至千里之外

• 不亦乐乎

成语

• 吾日三省吾身

• 见义勇为

• 既往不咎

• 不耻下问

• 三思而后行

• 举一反三

• 任重道远

• 后生可畏

• 欲速则不达

• 己所不欲，勿施于人

著名注疏

民国以前

• 《论语郑氏注》：郑玄注释，宋朝佚失，清以来有不少辑佚本，1900年后在敦煌和吐鲁番发现唐写本多种。

• 《论语集解》：何晏等人所撰。

• 《论语注疏》：十三经注疏之一，由清朝官员及学者阮元主持。版本来源于曹魏何晏作的注《论语集解》，以及北宋邢昺作的疏。

• 《论语义疏》：南朝皇侃

• 《论语集注》十卷：南宋朱熹著《四书章句集注》，是朱熹数十年心血之作，影响之后数百年，既讲义理，又重训诂。

• 《论语正义》：清刘宝楠。清朝儒生多不满意唐宋人对于经典的注疏，此书徵引广博，刘宝楠生前未完成，由其子刘恭冕完成。

民国后

• 《论语集释》：程树德编撰，是论语研究者的重要参考书。

• 《论语疏证》：杨树达

• 《论语新解》：钱穆

• 《论语今注今译》：毛子水注译，台湾商务印书馆《国学经典文丛》之一，风行海外，影响数代大学生、中学生。

• 《论语今读》：李泽厚

• 《论语讲要》：李炳南

• 《论语译注》：杨伯峻译注，反右运动前写定，1980年再版后颇受好评，为中华书局畅销书。

• 《〈论语〉批注》：北京大学哲学系1970级工农兵学员编写，为文革时期「批林批孔」的产物，内部发行。

• 《论语别裁》：南怀瑾

• 《论语注译》：杜道生

• 《论语通释》：王熙元

• 《论语通译》：徐志刚译，人民文学出版社出版，因其被列为中华人民共和国教育部《语文新课标》指定必读书目，所以有一定影响力。

• 《论语新注新译》：杨逢彬2016年著作。

评价

黑格尔：「我们看到孔子和他的弟子们的谈话（按即「论语」——译者贺麟注），里面所讲的是一种常识道德，这种常识道德我们在哪里都找得到，在哪一个民族里都找得到，可能还要好些，这是毫无出色之处的东西。 孔子只是一个实际的世间智者，在他那里思辨的哲学是一点也没有的——至于一些善良的、老练的、道德的教训，从里面我们不能获得什么特殊的东西。西塞罗留下给我们的《政治义务论》便是一本道德教训的书，比孔子的书内容丰富，而且更好。我们根据他的原著可以断言：为了保持孔子的名声，假如他的书从来未曾有过翻译，那倒是更好的事。」

程颐：「读论语：有读了全然无事者；有读了后其中得一两句喜者；有读了后知好之者；有读了后直有不知手之舞之足之蹈之者。」、「今人不会读书。如读论语，未读时是此等人，读了后又只是此等人，便是不曾读。」、「颐自十七八读论语，当时已晓文义。读之愈久，但觉意味深长。」

影响

• 日本：百济的五经博士王仁于公元5世纪初，王仁渡海前往日本，将《论语》当时两位名家郑玄与何晏的注疏献给日本应神天皇。使汉字在日本得到进一步的推广。而后圣德太子在各地设学问所。接著是当日本战国之后，德川幕府积极扶植儒家中的朱子学派以巩固统治基础。而当幕府大政奉还之后，明治维新时，又开始流行以论语来作为经商的道理。

• 已陆续翻译出三十多种语言。

考古发现

1900年，在敦煌文献中发现《论语郑氏注》的唐代写本残卷。

1973年，河北定州西汉中山王刘修墓出土竹简《论语》，1997年由文物出版社正式出版公布，是目前发现最早的《论语》写本。「定州汉简」还包含一批不属于《论语》，但记载孔子及其弟子言行的竹简，整理者定名为《儒家者言》，该书共整理出二十七章，与今本《孔子家语》有密切关系。

2016年8月，江西南昌西汉海昏侯墓出土竹书《论语·知道》篇，可能就是失传了1800年的〈齐论〉。在肩水金关遗址出土的居延汉简中也有释文相同的《论语》简牍，并包含其他的孔子语录，亦或为〈齐论〉的失传章句。