A JUST MAN AND A JUNZI: A COMPARISON OF RIGHTEOUSNESS BETWEEN GOSPEL OF MATTHEW AND MENCIUS

This thesis compares the concept of righteousness in two different traditions: yi
(義) in Mencius and righteousness (δικαιοσύνη) in Gospel of Matthew. The study
examines how both traditions understand righteousness by analyzing key texts and
teachings. For Mencius, righteousness comes from human nature, particularly the
natural sense of shame that guides moral behavior. For the Gospel of Matthew,
righteousness comes from God’s will and Jesus’s teachings about living according to
divine law.
Both traditions share important similarities: they emphasize that true righteousness
must come from inner motivation, not just external actions. Both reject mere rulefollowing
and instead focus on genuine moral response to specific situations. However,
they differ fundamentally in their foundations and goals. Mencius roots righteousness
in human nature and aims for worldly social harmony. Matthew roots righteousness in
God's nature and aims for the Kingdom of Heaven and eternal life. This comparison
reveals how different cultures approach moral thinking and offers insights for
contemporary ethical discussions.